Preamble

The House met at a quarter before Three of the Clock, Mr. Speaker in the Chair.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

COVENTRY CORPORATION BILL [Lords].

As amended, considered; to be read the Third time.

SELECTION.

Ordered,
That Sir Charles Edwards and Mr. Paling be discharged from the Committee of Selection and that Mr. Charleton and Mr. Mathers be added to the Committee."—[Mr. James Stuart.

Oral Answers to Questions — NATIONAL WAR EFFORT.

RESERVE LABOUR SUPPLY.

Sir Reginald Blair: asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour whether, in order to know the amount of reserve labour supply, he will ascertain and inform the House in due course how many unemployed persons, while continuing to receive benefit, refuse work either because the work is outside his or her own trade or because it is in a different town?

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour (Mr. Assheton): These statistics are not available. I would point out, however, that the reserve labour supply must consist mainly of persons now in employment in less essential industries and persons not ordinarily in employment at all.

Mr. Robert Gibson: How many men have been refused railway fares to another town, although they have been offered jobs there?

Mr. Assheton: I think that is another question.

AGRICULTURE (LABOUR).

Mr. John Morgan: asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour whether he is aware that large numbers of road employés attached to rural district councils are now busily engaged on brushing cow-parsley and surplus grass from Class B roadside wastes while nearby acres of sugar-beet, root and other vital crops are in want of labour for hoeing and singling the plants; and whether he will issue regulations forthwith requiring such road labour to be transferred to the farms at comparable wages?

Mr. Assheton: My right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport has asked the County Councils Association to convey to county councils generally his view that wherever possible, arrangements should be made for the transfer of men from road works to agricultural work, and has drawn attention to the provisions of the Local Government Staff (War Service) Act, 1939, under which my right hon. Friend the Minister of Health is prepared to recognise agricultural work as war service for the purposes of the Act. I understand that the Executive Committee of the County Councils Association is drawing the attention of county councils to the need for making these arrangements. The whole question of securing an adequate supply of labour for agriculture is under consideration.

Mr. Morgan: Does the answer just given represent the present attitude of the Government to this question, and is the hon. Gentleman aware that if three weeks are allowed to pass it will be no good shifting these men off the roads in order to do the work, and that the work will remain undone? Is he aware that it is a question of now or not at all?

Mr. Assheton: I can assure the hon. Member that very few Ministers are moving faster than my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour.

Mr. Morgan: In this matter is any pressing action going to be taken by the Minister of Labour, and not the Minister of Transport?

Mr. Assheton: I do not think the hon. Member will have to wait very long.

Sir Percy Hurd: Will the same action be taken in the case of the 400 rural district councils?

Sir Henry Morris-Jones: May I ask my hon. Friend what immediate steps are being taken in this matter?

Mr. Assheton: My right hon. Friend is fully aware of this difficulty and is actively dealing with the matter, and I hope that some announcement will be made shortly. The question of rural district councils' employés will certainly be considered.

LOCOMOTIVE WORKS EMPLOYES (DISCHARGE).

Mr. Thorne: asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour whether he is aware that boiler-makers, riveters and other craftsmen have been discharged from the Stratford locomotive works; and what action he intends taking about the matter?

Mr. Sorensen: asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour whether he is aware of the complaints that men in the London and North Eastern Railway shops at Stratford are not being fully employed or are likely to be dismissed; and whether he is taking action fully to utilise both men and plant at that place?

Mr. Assheton: I would ask my hon. Friends to await the reply to be given by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport to a Question on the same subject by the hon. Member for Stratford (Mr. Groves).

Mr. Groves: asked the Minister of Transport whether he is aware that a considerable number of workmen are under notice at the Stratford section of the London and North Eastern Railway; and whether, in view of the request of the Government that workers shall remain at their posts as much as is possible, he will cause immediate inquiries to be made and ensure that the services of these men be retained and further orders provided for these works?

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport (Mr. Montague): I understand that 26 men are being liberated from the boiler shop at Stratford to enable them to take up work of national importance appropriate to their qualifications in outside industry. Ten of these men will take up their new work tomorrow, and the others will be released as soon as arrangements for them to commence their new work are completed.

Mr. Groves: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that 30 men received their notices to-day and, as far as they are aware, there is no further job for them to go to; and is that the new idea of liberation, that they should get the sack?

Mr. Montague: I should imagine that the notices were purely formal. My information is that they have other jobs to go to.

Mr. Sorensen: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that many of the men have had no such explanation of those notices?

Mr. Montague: That is the advantage of having the explanation now.

INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION, SCOTLAND.

Mr. J. J. Davidson: asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour whether he intends to set up a Scottish committee, with appropriate powers, for the purpose of obtaining the maximum industrial production of Scottish industry?

Mr. Assheton: The new organisation set up by my right hon. Friend provides for the transfer to the Ministry of Labour and National Service of the Area Board for Scotland, and one of the Board's main objects will be to ensure the distribution of labour for war production to the best possible advantage.

Mr. Davidson: Can the hon. Gentleman say whether that Area Board is now operating, or whether it will operate in the very near future?

Mr. Assheton: I believe the Area Board is set up, and it will certainly operate in the very near future.

Mr. Davidson: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that many Scottish industries of a big character and big organisation are practically at the point of disbanding their organisation, although they have men who are absolutely essential for national service?

Mr. Assheton: That is another Question.

Oral Answers to Questions — MILITARY SERVICE.

ENGINEERS (RELEASE).

Mr. Ellis Smith: asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour whether he is aware that the trade unions have spent money and time in try-


ing to assist in the best utilisation of the services of skilled and semi-skilled engineers; that they are disappointed at the results achieved in regard to the release of urgently-required men from the Armed Forces, many of whom could be employed for the purpose of training others for special operations; that there are hundreds of engineers in infantry regiments and technical units who in many cases are employed in picking up paper, peeling potatoes, and acting as batmen or cooks; and what steps does he propose to take to get these engineers, of whom he has particulars, back into industry?

Mr. Assheton: I am aware that valuable assistance has been given by certain trade unions in this matter. As the hon. Member is no doubt aware, a very substantial number of men have already been released from the Forces for work in industry and the question of there lease of other men is constantly under consideration. In spite of great difficulties I am satisfied that the Service Departments are taking appropriate action to ensure that, so far as possible, proper use is made of the industrial skill of engineers and others who are members of the Forces.

Mr. E. Smith: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that that appropriate action is not showing any concrete results, and that I have here a letter from one of the largest trade unions involved which expresses disappointment at the result? If I hand this letter to the hon. Gentleman, will he make full investigations into the matter in order that the position may be improved?

Mr. Assheton: I should be only too happy to make the fullest investigation into any cases referred to in the letter, but I do hope it will not be thought that nothing has been done in this matter.

Sir Percy Harris: Can the hon. Gentleman give us an assurance that there is direct and intimate contact between the Ministry of Labour and the Service Departments on this matter?

Mr. Assheton: Yes, Sir. There is constant contact between ourselves and the Service Departments interested, on these matters.

Mr. Batey: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this letter says that fewer than 50 men, skilled engineers, have been released?

Mr. Assheton: As I have not yet had an opportunity of considering the letter, I cannot deal with it at the moment.

Mr. G. Strauss: Approximately how many men have been released altogether?

Mr. Assheton: The last time the Secretary of State gave an answer to such a question, he said that it was the equivalent of two divisions.

Mr. Cocks: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that out of 3,000 special cases put forward by an important union during six months, only 12 have been released?

Mr. Assheton: I am not aware of that case.

MEDICAL BOARDS.

Mr. Rhys Davies: asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour whether he will consider amending Section 11, Sub-section (1) (f), of the National Service (Armed Forces) Act, 1939, in order to permit local authorities to give information for the use of medical boards relative to men known to mental welfare associations as being mentally deranged or mentally disordered?

Mr. Assheton: I shall be glad to arrange to lay before medical boards any information of the kind indicated which may be offered. It does not appear necessary for this purpose to amend Section 11 (1) (f) of the National Service (Armed Forces) Act, which defines the classes of men not liable to be summoned for medical examination.

CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS.

Sir J. Smedley Crooke: asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour whether, in view of the disparity in the rate of pay of His Majesty's Forces and that of the wages of conscientious objectors who are placed in work by tribunals, he will again consider the advisability of taking steps to amend the law so as to provide that the rate of pay for such work done shall not be higher than the pay and allowances of those serving in His Majesty's Forces?

Mr. Assheton: This matter has again been considered and I have nothing to add to the reply I gave to my hon. Friend so recently as Tuesday last.

Sir J. Smedley Crooke: Is my hon. Friend aware that there is great indignation all over the country on this matter,


and is he aware that conscientious objectors are getting work at £5 or £6 a week while brave soldiers are going through hell at 2s. a day?

Mr. Assheton: My hon. Friend will not forget that this matter was debated and considered by Parliament, and that the Minister is acting on the instructions which he received from Parliament.

Commander Locker-Lampson: Could not some conscientious objectors be invited to work on the land?

Mr. Assheton: Yes, Sir. Some are being directed to work on the land.

RESERVED OCCUPATIONS.

Miss Rathbone: asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour whether he has considered the request of the Chartered Institute of Patent Agents to have the profession of patent agency scheduled as a reserved occupation, on the ground that patent agents are almost, without exception, qualified either as chemists or as mechanical or electrical engineers; and whether he is prepared to do this?

Mr. Assheton: It has been decided to include patent agents and their technical assistants of and over the age of 30 under the Schedule of Reserved Occupations.

REFUGEES.

Mr. Sorensen: asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour whether he is aware of the expressed desire of Austrian refugees in this country either to join the Pioneer Corps or to engage in group land-work; of the appeal by the Austria office to Austrian refugees in this country; and whether he will utilise as they desire the offer of these refugees to undertake some service on behalf of this country?

Mr. Assheton: I am informed by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for War that any alien who is considered suitable is accepted for service in the Auxiliary Military Pioneer Corps. In regard to civil employment, Austrian refugees are permitted to take any employment subject to security considerations, and provided there are no suitable British subjects available. Further steps to utilise the services of certain classes

of aliens in this country are at present under consideration.

Mr. Graham White: asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will take steps forthwith to secure that refugees in scheduled areas who have been interned only on account of their residence in such areas, without having been afforded any opportunity to move into non-scheduled areas, shall be released from internment provided they move immediately into non-scheduled areas?

The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Sir John Anderson): I had contemplated that the position of the male Germans and Austrians recently interned from the prohibited coastal zone would be reviewed as soon as circumstances permitted; but I regret that, having regard to the paramount considerations of national security, there can be no question at present of individual review except where release can be shown to be definitely and directly in the national interest or possibly in the case of youths undergoing training or education.

Mr. G. Strauss: Is it intended to keep interned people who happened just for that day, or for that particular week-end, to be in one of the prohibited areas, when they normally live in London?

Sir J. Anderson: For the time being it is physically impossible to give consideration to individual cases.

Captain Shaw: asked the Home Secretary how much public money has been spent in conformity with the announcement, on the 1st February, 1940, under which a limited State grant was to be given to help refugees in this country; how many of the refugees who were admitted on the understanding that they would emigrate to overseas are still in this country; and whether all those who undertook to be responsible for the support of refugees are fulfilling their obligations?

Sir J. Anderson: The sum of £207,000 has been granted to the Central Committee for Refugees as a contribution towards the expenditure incurred by the organisations which are raising funds from voluntary sources to maintain German and Austrian refugees in this country. Of the total number of about 55,000 Germans and


Austrians who were classified as refugees by the tribunals, some 5,000 have emigrated since the beginning of this year. With negligible exceptions, all who undertook responsibility for these refugees have honourably fulfilled their obligations.

Mr. Roland Robinson: asked the Home Secretary what steps are being taken to apprehend members of the fifth column who may attempt to enter the country in the guise of refugees?

Sir J. Anderson: It would not be in the public interest to give any detailed account of the measures taken, but I would refer to my reply of last Thursday to Questions on this subject, and I can assure my hon. Friend that all practicable measures are being taken for this purpose.

Sir Gifford Fox: asked the Home Secretary how the defection of the King of the Belgians with his Army in spite of the decision of the Belgian Government to continue, so far as lies in its power, the war against Germany affects Belgian refugees in this country?

Sir J. Anderson: All alien war refugees are subject to certain restrictions imposed by an Order made by me on the 21st May. The events referred to by my hon. Friend do not seem to me to affect the position of Belgian refugees to whom this country has given asylum.

KING'S NATIONAL ROLL.

Mr. Burke: asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour how many firms are now registered on the King's National Roll; and how many disabled ex-Service men they employ compared with December, 1938?

Mr. Assheton: The number of employers enrolled on the King's National Roll on 8th April, 1940, was 26,409. These employed 319,430 disabled ex-Service men. 323,437 disabled ex-Service men were employed by enrolled firms on 9th January, 1939.

DENTAL MECHANICS.

Mr. Burke: asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour whether the Committee of Inquiry into the conditions of labour, etc., of dental mechanics has yet issued a report?

Mr. Assheton: I am informed that the report of the committee set up by the professional associations regarding dental mechanics is almost completed.

DRAINAGE (WEDNESFIELD).

Mr. Mander: asked the Minister of Health whether he will consider the advisability of arranging for an inspector of his Department to visit Wednesfield, Staffordshire, with a view to exercising his good offices in connection with the petition that was recently presented by 407 residents in Broad Lane and Stubby Lane, complaining of certain conditions, in finding a solution to the problem which will be satisfactory to all concerned?

The Minister of Health (Mr. Malcolm MacDonald): I am arranging for one of my inspectors to visit the area as soon as practicable.

Mr. Mander: Will the right hon. Gentleman let me know when he is going so that perhaps I might have an opportunity of seeing him, too?

Mr. MacDonald: Certainly, I will let the hon. Member know when he is going.

CIVIL DEFENCE.

NURSES.

Mr. De la Bère: asked the Minister of Health whether, with a view to encouraging highly-trained nurses who emanate from the recognised teaching medical schools, he will take steps to eliminate, as far as possible, the unqualified but titled people who are hampering the development of this work in many parts of the country, since highly-trained women will follow best an equally highly-trained matron from a teaching school of known repute?

Mr. M. MacDonald: I am not aware of any hospital, whether in the emergency scheme or not, where trained nurses do not work under the control of a matron who is herself a trained nurse. Perhaps my hon. Friend will send me further particulars of the difficulty which he has in mind.

Mr. De la Bère: Does my right hon. Friend realise that there are many cases where they have neither the ability nor


the mind to organise properly and that the same thing is happening in this war as in the last war? Perhaps he will kindly go into this matter with me afterwards.

Mr. MacDonald: If the hon. Member has any information which he thinks I Ought to have, I shall be glad to receive it, but the position, I am advised, is as stated in the answer to the Question.

Commander Locker-Lampson: May I ask that nurses do not remain grossly underpaid?

Miss Rathbone: Is it not a case that the supply of highly-trained nurses and matrons is running short, and that it is highly desirable to bring in capable women, whether they are titled or not, to help in the administrative work?

Mr. Speaker: That does not arise out of the Question.

EVACUATION.

Commander King-Hall: asked the Minister of Health whether, as the chief reason for not evacuating children from vulnerable areas is the unwillingness of parents to acquiesce in this operation whilst it remains on a voluntary basis, he will consider increasing the ability of the air-raid precautions services successfully to deal with damage by putting the evacuation scheme on a compulsory basis before an air attack takes place?

Mr. David Adams: asked the Minister of Health whether he is prepared to give immediate and favourable consideration to requests from local authorities that they should be empowered compulsorily to evacuate all schoolchildren, invalids and aged persons under their jurisdiction, whenever it is decided that such action is necessary?

Mr M. MacDonald: Apart from other considerations, arising both in evacuation and reception areas, my information from all parts of the country is that a considerable proportion of parents would not co-operate in any scheme for their compulsory separation from their children. The Government's policy therefore is to encourage to the maximum extent possible the registration of schoolchildren for voluntary evacuation, and steps are being taken to achieve this. With regard to

the evacuation of invalids and aged persons I have nothing to add to previous answers on the subject.

Commander King-Hall: What actual steps are being taken to persuade parents to co-operate in a matter which is, clearly, in the Government's view, essential, having regard to the orders which have been given; and has it not now gone beyond the time when we ought to have compulsion?

Mr. David Adams: Is the Minister not fully aware of the fact that the refusal of parents to agree to the children being evacuated, may mean, in the event of air raids, the destruction of a great deal of child life?

Mr. MacDonald: We have taken all considerations into account and as a result of that, we have, quite deliberately, come to the conclusion—with which I think the vast majority of the local authorities concerned agree—that we should continue this as a voluntary scheme. With regard to my hon. and gallant Friend's Question, certain further steps are being taken this evening which will be announced in due course.

Vice-Admiral Taylor: Is my right hon. Friend aware that it will be impossible under a voluntary system to secure the evacuation of all these children; and as it is in the interest of the children themselves and the country that they should be evacuated, is it not necessary for the Government to make it compulsory?

Mr. R. C. Morrison: asked the Minister of Health whether he will arrange an evacuation plan for old people?

Mr. MacDonald: Plans for the evacuation of school children are already taxing accommodation in the reception areas very severely, and I am afraid that it is not practicable to include within the Government's evacuation scheme special arrangements for the removal of large numbers of old people.

Mr. Morrison: Will my right hon. Friend acquaint himself with the proposal which was made by the Government in September, 1938, during the Munich crisis, to pay the fares of old people who could get accommodation with friends or relatives in the country; and is he aware that if an offer were made, to provide free transport for such old people, thousands


who have friends and relatives in the country would take advantage of it?

Mrs. Tate: In view of the very acute shortage of accommodation in the country, not only for children, but for land workers—[Interruption].

Mr. David Adams: asked the Minister of Health whether powers will immediately be taken to enable local authorities to take over large houses and other buildings in relatively safe areas for purposes of housing evacuees from dangerous areas, recognising that the unpopularity of private billeting is a principal reason for large numbers of schoolchildren and others now being in danger areas?

Mr. MacDonald: In dealing with the large-scale evacuation of schoolchildren, billeting in private houses must continue to be the main method on which we depend, since there is no other form of accommodation which could be made available on the necessary scale. I have, however, informed local authorities in a memorandum, of which I am sending the hon. Member a copy, that I am ready to entertain proposals for the establishment of hostels in suitable cases where the difficulties of finding suitable accommodation for children cannot otherwise be solved.

Mr. Hicks: Would the right hon. Gentleman consider publishing in the Official Report the circular referred to, so that the information contained therein may be available for all?

Mr. MacDonald: I will consider it.

Mr. David Adams: May I ask whether at the same time there will be an extension of the camp school movement and a provision of additional camps?

Mr. MacDonald: In so far as camps are available, for this purpose certainly, but it is impossible at this stage, owing to other requirements, to expect any large extension of that accommodation in the near future.

Lieut-Colonel Sir Thomas Moore: Are the Government prepared to provide equipment and furniture for these houses should the local authorities take them over?

Mr. MacDonald: Certainly, in one way or another, the Government will have to be satisfied with the accommodation.

Mr. Hamilton Kerr: asked the Home Secretary whether he will issue an instruction that, in the event of air raids on this country, the civil population shall remain quietly at home, and not attempt to evacuate in mass unless a definite order is received from the local authorities?

Sir J. Anderson: Yes, Sir. Action is being taken in the sense indicated in the Question.

HOMING PIGEONS (LICENCE).

Mr. A. Edwards: asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is now in a position to make a statement regarding the case of Christopher Newbold, recently sentenced for keeping homing pigeons without a licence?

Sir J. Anderson: I have already communicated my decision to my hon. Friend.

Mr. Edwards: While the Minister's action in this particular instance will be very much appreciated, is there any means of testing the capacity of these men who repeatedly commit these vicious acts?

Sir J. Anderson: That is not primarily a matter for me.

DELAYED ACTION BOMBS.

Mr. Higgs: asked the Home Secretary whether he will issue instructions to the public immediately as to how delayed action bombs are to be dealt with?

Sir J. Anderson: It is not necessary nor do I think it desirable to instruct the general public in this matter. The Civil Defence authorities will take prompt action for the safety of the public; and any bombs, whether unexploded or delayed action, will be dealt with by skilled parties.

Mr. Higgs: Is the Minister aware of the difficulties which arise in some areas in getting hold of people capable of handling these bombs?

Sir J. Anderson: A special organisation has been set up for the purpose.

AIR-RAID WARDENS (COMPULSORY SERVICE).

Mr. Higgs: asked the Home Secretary whether he is aware of the growing feeling amongst senior air-raid wardens that service should be made compulsory;


and is he prepared to consider introducing legislation to compel men in reserved occupations to serve eight or 12 hours a week on National Service?

Sir J. Anderson: In view of the powers conferred by the Emergency Powers (Defence) Act, 1940, special legislation would not now be necessary for the purpose indicated by the hon. Member.

Mr. Higgs: Is the Minister aware that there are 250,000 wardens needed throughout the country, and that the £3 a week paid to wardens for 12 hours work a day is unsatisfactory?

Sir J. Anderson: That matter has already been reviewed.

AUXILIARY FIRE SERVICE (REORGANISATION).

Sir J. Lucas: asked the Home Secretary (1) whether he is aware that the proposed dismissal of 1,300 trained women members of the Auxiliary Fire Service is causing grave concern, in view of the present crisis; and whether he will make an announcement on the subject;
(2) whether he will consult with the proper authorities with a view to seeing that any competent women members of the Auxiliary Fire Service who may be dismissed from motives of economy will be given an opportunity of transferring to the Auxiliary Territorial Service or other suitable body, in view of the fact that the vast majority of those affected joined from motives of patriotism, and not for financial reasons?

Sir J. Anderson: As part of the normal reorganisation of the London Auxiliary Fire Service it will shortly be necessary to reduce the number of the women telephonists, and some 500 of these will probably be released during the next few weeks. This action will not impair the efficiency of the organisation, and steps will be taken to allow any women affected to be given the opportunity of transferring to the Auxiliary Territorial Service or other similar services. The number given in my hon. Friend's Question apparently includes about 630 cooks. There is no question of reducing the total number of cooks employed, but their position in the organisation is to be altered.

PERSONNEL (ARMS).

Mr. Cocks: asked the Home Secretary whether it is proposed to supply the fire brigades and certain air-raid precautions services, as well as the police force, with appropriate weapons, including machine-guns?

Sir J. Anderson: The provision of armed protection in appropriate cases is receiving attention, but it would not be expedient to give details.

AIR-RAID SHELTERS.

Mr. E. Smith: asked the Home Secretary whether he has considered the air-raid precautions report submitted to him by the Association of Architects, Surveyors and Technical Assistants; and, if so, can he make a statement on the report and indicate what action he proposes to take?

Sir J. Anderson: I have studied this report with interest. It may be said, speaking broadly, to assemble the conclusions of a number of schools of thought which favour large, centralised, and so far as possible strongly protected, shelters. It would be quite impracticable at the present time to initiate a new shelter policy, whatever its merits, which deviated so sharply from the general scheme by which shelter has been, and continues to be, provided by the local authorities and by the Government.

Mr. Smith: asked the Home Secretary whether he has received a report on the progress made with air-raid shelters since the issue of his circular, H.S.C. 38/40/O; whether he is satisfied that the advice and requests contained in the circular have been acted upon; what action is being taken to see that adequate air-raid shelter accommodation is provided for the lower income grades; whether he is satisfied that the authorities responsible have acted, or are taking immediate steps to act, upon circulars H.S.C. 68/40/O.I. and H.S.C. 77/40/O.I; whether he was consulted by the Board of Education before circular Administrative Memorandum No. 212, 17th February, 1940, was issued; and whether he will make a statement on the whole position?

Sir J. Anderson: It would be impossible within the limits of an answer to a Parliamentary Question to deal fully with all the matters raised in this Question. I


receive monthly reports on the progress of shelter construction in the specified areas, and examination of these shows that as a whole local authorities are acting upon the recommendations made in the circulars mentioned and are pressing forward with the use of brick and concrete shelters, including communal shelters, upon which it has now become necessary to concentrate in view of urgent demands for steel for other purposes. It is, however, true that in many parts of the country suitable labour is at a premium and work is thereby delayed, and that some authorities have fallen below the general standard of effective work. The Government will continue to press upon all concerned the vital importance of concerted and vigorous efforts in this matter. I should add that the memorandum by the Board of Education was issued after consultation with my Department.

Mr. Smith: If it is true that the Government have pressed for this matter to be dealt with in districts where labour is available, what is the right hon. Gentleman doing to see that the local authorities carry out the suggestions made in the circular?

Sir J. Anderson: We are doing everything possible by personal calls and by correspondence, and immense progress has been made, especially in some of the worst areas.

Mr. J. J. Davidson: Has the right hon. Gentleman any powers to deal with areas that may be termed backward where labour and other things are not available?

Sir J. Anderson: Yes, every assistance is given in the way of lending staff from my organisation to local authorities and I have additional powers under the Act recently passed.

Mr. Noel-Baker: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the utilisation of voluntary labour for this purpose?

Sir J. Anderson: I have encouraged in every way possible the use of voluntary labour in increasing protection in the homes of the people, but for work which has to be carried out on a large scale it is necessary to resort to the ordinary method.

DEAF PERSONS (BADGES).

Mr. R. Robinson: asked the Home Secretary whether he will consider issuing

a special lapel badge in white enamel to deaf persons to indicate to sentries on duty at certain strategic points that approaching people are deaf and will not halt when ordered to do so, thus avoiding confusion?

Sir J. Anderson: I do not think that it would be practicable to give effect to my hon. Friend's suggestion.

WATER RESERVOIRS (PROTECTION).

Captain Vyvyan Adams: asked the Home Secretary what steps are being taken to guard reservoirs throughout the country against destruction or pollution by parachutists or sympathisers with the enemy?

Mr. Ralph Etherton: asked the Home Secretary whether he has considered the resolutions passed at a meeting at Manchester, on 22nd May, of 20 northern waterworks authorities representing almost every waterworks authority in the North of England; whether he has since then taken any additional steps; and whether military protection is now afforded to waterworks undertakings?

Sir J. Anderson: It would not be in the public interest to give details of the protection arrangements for waterworks, but I can assure my hon. Friends that this matter is receiving full consideration. I may add that the undertakings would be well advised to arrange for the enrolment of their own personnel in the Local Defence Volunteers for service at their own works.

NAZI SYMPATHISERS.

Captain Adams: asked the Home Secretary whether further steps are in progress, or contemplation, against notorious sympathisers with Nazi Ger many?

Sir J. Anderson: It would not be in the public interest to announce in advance what further measures are in contemplation.

Viscountess Astor: Is it wise to lock up a man and leave his wife free when the wife is more notorious than the man?

Vice-Admiral Taylor: And probably under 60?

AGRICULTURAL WORKERS (HOUSING).

Mr. R. Morgan: asked the Minister of Health whether, having regard to the


need for extending the production of food and the delay in the construction of new dwellings, he will recommend local authorities to authorise the reoccupation by agricultural workers of dwelling houses subject to demolition orders, in cases where it is shown that suitable alternative accommodation is not available in the area?

Mr. M. MacDonald: I am considering, in consultation with my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, whether present circumstances are such that there is a case for permitting, under restrictions, the temporary reoccupation of the least unfit of the houses referred to by my hon. Friend.

NATIONAL HEALTH INSURANCE. (EX-SERVICE MEN).

Mr. Burke: asked the Minister of Health how many disabled ex-service men receive free treatment under the National Health Insurance Act from the Army and Navy Fund?

Mr. M. MacDonald: The number of disabled uninsured ex-service men in receipt of free medical benefit under the National Health Insurance Acts at the cost of the Navy, Army and Air Force Insurance Fund on the 31st March, 1940, was 11,153.

IDENTITY CARDS.

Mr. R. C. Morrison: asked the Minister of Health whether he will take steps to give power to local registration officers to remit, in exceptional cases, the charge of 1s. for replacement of an identity card?

Mr. M. MacDonald: Local national registration officers have been authorised in many individual cases of an exceptional nature to waive the charge referred to; and general instructions on this subject are already in preparation.

Sir Frank Sanderson: asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware of the danger of unauthorised persons demanding from civilians and, in particular, from the younger generation the production of their identity cards and then appropriating them to their own use; whether he will enumerate the classes of persons who are entitled to the production of an identity card; and whether he will

give clear and definite instructions by broadcast as to who are the responsible authorities who have this power?

Mr. MacDonald: I appreciate the importance of the point raised by my hon. Friend, which received very full consideration in Parliament during the passage of the National Registration Act. No persons have authority to demand the production of identity cards except a police constable in uniform, a member of His Majesty's Naval, Military or Air Forces in uniform on duty, and a local national registration officer. In the last mentioned case the power would be exercised in the local national registration office. The answer to the last part of the Question is in the affirmative.

Sir F. Sanderson: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a large number of these cards have been misplaced or lost; and will he not consider having on the cards further identification particulars such as the photograph, or at any rate the age of the owner of the card?

Mr. MacDonald: With regard to the photograph, I cannot add to the answers which have been given previously. I very much hope that this whole difficulty will be greatly eased by the broadcast of information which we propose to make.

Sir F. Sanderson: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the question of putting the age on the card?

NAVAL AND MILITARY PENSIONS AND GRANTS.

Sir T. Moore: asked the Minister of Pensions what is the approximate weekly amount now being paid to the dependants of men who lost their lives as a result of the sinking of merchant vessels since the outbreak of war?

The Minister of Pensions (Sir Walter Womersley): Approximately £850 a week is being paid in pensions and allowances to the widows and other dependants of members of the Mercantile Marine who have lost their lives as a result of enemy action since the outbreak of war.

Mr. Dobbie: asked the Minister of Pensions whether it is the practice to inform applicants for assistance that, under the War Assistance Allowance


Committee, Form 21, in cases of rejection of claim in the first instance they have a right of appeal against such decision, and if such information is not given to them, will he consider giving the applicants such information when the decision of rejection is conveyed to them?

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Pensions (Miss Wilkinson): Any person whose application to the War Service Grants Advisory Committee is rejected, may at any time renew his or her application, and the case is then reconsidered in the light of the information supplied. The committee has no reason to doubt that this is appreciated, but any general invitation to appeal would not only heavily increase administrative difficulties but would be likely in the majority of cases to give rise to false hopes. My hon. Friend, however, fully appreciates the point and will consider what he can do to meet it.

Mr. Hicks: Will the hon. Lady see that the Government get a move on in this matter?

Miss Wilkinson: I am glad to say that my hon. Friend and I are doing that now.

Mr. Dobbie: asked the Minister of Pensions what is the basis of assessment taken into consideration when a claim is made for assistance for dependants of the Armed Forces owing to hardship when the member of the Forces has been unemployed previous to being called to the Service, or where the man in the Service has been an apprentice in industry and would have finished his apprenticeship in the ordinary course shortly after the time of his being called up for Service?

Mr. Mort: asked the Minister of Pensions whether the principle has yet been settled of pay to the families of men nearly out of their apprenticeship time, on the date of enlistment, with the grants taxed on their journeyman's wages in stead of apprentice pay?

Miss Wilkinson: Each case is judged on its merits but I may say, generally, that in the case of a man who was normally employed but happened to be unemployed when called up, the basis of assessment of any grant on account of hardship for the benefit of his family would be the wage he would have been expected to

earn if he had been employed. As regards the second part of the Question the basis of assessment would normally be the wage the man would have been earning if the apprentice hip had terminated before the calling up.

Mr. Tomlinson: Will the hon. Lady explain why enlistment in the Army previous to calling-up is looked upon as a disadvantage from the applicant's point of view?

Miss Wilkinson: Perhaps I may answer that question by asking my hon. Friend whether he means the regular Service man?

Mr. Tomlinson: The question which I wish to ask is why an unemployed man who joins the Army before being called up, is, because of having joined, denied this dependant's pension?

Miss Wilkinson: Those are regulations which are concerned with another Department.

Mr. Liddall: Would the hon. Lady have been satisfied with that reply if she had been sitting on the other side of the House?

Miss Wilkinson: Certainly.

SUNDAY TRADING ACT.

Mr. Salt: asked the Home Secretary whether, in consideration that both men and women are now working long hours on munitions, including Saturday afternoons and Sundays up to 4 and 5 p.m., he will take steps to relax the restrictions due to the Sunday Trading Act, 1936, and so enable these people to make their necessary purchases?

Sir J. Anderson: The provisions of the Sunday Trading Act allowed of a number of exemptions and I have no evidence that further relaxation is necessary at the present time.

Mr. Rhys Davies: In dealing with any problems of this kind will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that shop assistants are now working longer hours than munition workers?

Sir J. Anderson: Yes, Sir, I recognise that that must be taken into consideration.

Mr. Salt: Undoubtedly there is evidence in industrial areas that some provision is seriously needed in order that workers can have the opportunity of purchasing necessities.

Sir J. Anderson: Perhaps the hon. Member will let me have any evidence he has on the subject.

Mr. Leslie: Is the Minister aware that there is no occupation in this country which has contributed more men to the Army and Navy than the distributive trades, and that girls are now filling the men's places?

ALIENS.

Colonel Burton: asked the Home Secretary whether any arms and/or ammunition have been found upon the person or premises or under the control of any aliens in this country?

Sir J. Anderson: While I could not, without prolonged inquiry, say whether in recent years cases have occurred in which aliens were found to be in unlawful possession of firearms or ammunition, I have no information to suggest that failure to comply with the law relating to the possession of firearms is prevalent among aliens.

Vice-Admiral Taylor: asked the Home Secretary whether he will have all aliens in category B interned forthwith?

Sir J. Anderson: As has been announced in the Press, I have ordered the internment of all category B Germans and Austrians, male and female, between the ages of 16 and 60, with the exception of the infirm and invalid, and the internment of these persons has already been carried out.

Vice-Admiral Taylor: Is the Minister aware that the age limit of 60 does not automatically prohibit anybody above that age from doing harm to this country if he wishes to do so? Would it not be very much better to have the age limit raised to make sure that those people over 60 cannot do any harm?

Sir J. Anderson: I have already said that action taken so far does not represent finality.

Vice-Admiral Taylor: Is the Minister aware that those under 60—

Mr. Speaker: rose—

Vice-Admiral Taylor: This is a very important subject, and, therefore, may I not ask my right hon. Friend another Supplementary Question?

Mr. Speaker: The hon. and gallant Member does not emphasise it more by repetition.

Major Sir Jocelyn Lucas: asked the Home Secretary whether he will consider reviewing the number of foreign waiters employed in restaurants and road houses in the vicinity of important aerodromes and aircraft factories and take action in the matter?

Sir J. Anderson: I know of no reason to discriminate between foreign waiters and aliens engaged in other occupations, but I can assure my hon. and gallant Friend that I shall not hesitate to take appropriate action in the case of any alien whose activities give rise to suspicion.

Mr. Thurtle: Will the Minister, in the interest of public safety, have an inquiry made into the Savoy Hotel, which is staffed with anti-British Italians, seeing that highly placed officers frequently dine there?

Sir J. Anderson: All these matters are constantly under review.

Colonel Burton: asked the Home Secretary whether he can state the number of enemy aliens in this country, as to males and females, and the number of each which have been interned?

Captain Shaw: asked the Home Secretary how many male and female enemy aliens between the ages of 16 and 60 are still uninterned in this country?

Sir J. Anderson: The numbers of persons of German or Austrian nationality in this country are approximately 31,000 males and 42,000 females, of whom about 5,600 and 3,200 respectively are interned.

Mr. Cocks: asked the Home Secretary whether he has now come to a decision on the question of interning all enemy aliens, irrespective of sex, including those over 60 years of age?

Sir J. Anderson: It would not be in the public interest to announce any decision which may be taken on this subject before it is put into effect.

Mr. Cocks: Is not the Minister's opinion that a man over 60 might be a danger to England, seeing what a great danger to Germany is the Prime Minister, who is 65?

Sir Ernest Graham-Little: asked the Home Secretary the composition of the Home Office Advisory Medical Committee dealing with the admission to Great Britain of foreign medical practitioners; the secretary of this committee; the total number of foreign medical practitioners entering this country since the German invasion of Austria in March, 1938, who have been placed on the medical register and allowed to remain in this country without such registration, respectively; how many of these are of German, Austrian or Czecho-Slovakian nationality, respectively; and whether any precautions were adopted, or are now in operation, to prevent enemy agents from being included in these admissions and allowed to remain at liberty?

Sir J. Anderson: As the answer is necessarily detailed, I will with permission arrange for it to be circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the answer:

After the invasion of Austria and Czecho-Slovakia my predecessor, after consultation with the medical profession, decided that 50 Austrian and 50 Czech refugee doctors might be allowed, provided they obtained a British medical qualification, to practise in this country. Of these 100 persons only four, all of whom are Austrians, have as yet obtained a British medical qualification. The bona fides of all the doctors so admitted to this country was carefully tested before they were allowed to come here, and since the outbreak of war each case has been examined by one of the tribunals appointed for the purpose.

The committee which advised the Home Office in the selection of these doctors consisted of the following persons—

Sir Robert Hutchison (Chairman).
Sir Cuthbert Wallace.
Sir William Willcox.
Dr. G. C. Anderson.
Sir William Girling Ball.
Dr. P. W. d'Arcy Hart.
Professor Samson Wright.
Mrs. M. Ormerod.
Mrs. Y. Kapp (Secretary).

Sir G. Fox: asked the Home Secretary whether he has satisfied himself that the large number of alien students and others in the different universities should not in extreme cases come within the scope of the internment regulations; and whether all the chief constables concerned are satisfied with the position in their respective districts?

Sir J. Anderson: In the measures taken for the internment of certain classes of persons of enemy alien nationality, no differentiation has been made in favour of students or persons working in universities. If my hon. Friend has in mind the internment of individuals as distinct from the internment of classes of persons, all chief constables are aware that in any case where the character or conduct of an individual gives ground for suspicion, appropriate action can be taken.

Sir G. Fox: Have chief constables been informed that any students or others of whose loyalty to the country they have any doubt, whoever they may be, are to be interned immediately?

Sir J. Anderson: They have been informed that they should send particulars of any individual cases to the appropriate quarter and immediate consideration will be given to the question of internment.

Vice-Admiral Taylor: Will any alien professors over 60 be dealt with?

SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES.

35. Mr. Mander: asked the Home Secretary what action he proposes to take with reference to the National Freedom League, an organisation engaged in pro-Nazi and anti-Semitic propaganda, and illegally publishing leaflets without an address or publishing office?

Sir J. Anderson: No organisation of this name has so far come under notice.

Mr. Mander: If I can give the right hon. Gentleman details of this organisation will he be good enough to look into them?

Sir J. Anderson: I may find that it is only a well-known organisation masquerading under another name.

Mr. Graham White: asked the Home Secretary whether he has yet received the


report on the police raid on the London office of the National and Provincial Anti-Vivisection Society; and, if so, what action he has taken on it?

Sir J. Anderson: Yes, Sir. One of the people connected with this Anti-Vivisection Society was an adherent of the British Union of Fascists and was using the office of the society for British Union business. The searching of this office was one of a number of steps taken for the purpose of investigating the activities of the British Union.

Dr. Little: asked the Home Secretary whether he has taken cognisance of the anti-British activities of an organisation calling itself Information and Policy, which holds weekly meetings under the guise of discussing the relation between agriculture and industry, but which are really held for German propaganda purposes; and whether he will take immediate steps to dissolve this organisation, bring its meetings to a close, and inquire into the antecedents and activities of its members?

Mr. Silkin: asked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been drawn to a meeting, held on the 23rd May last, at the Alliance Hall, Palmer Street, Westminster, of an organisation calling itself Information and Policy, at which anti-British and pro-Nazi speeches were made; and what action he proposes to take against this organisation?

Sir J. Anderson: I have information about this body, which has been under observation for some time. It would not be right for me to announce beforehand what action it may be necessary for me to take.

Dr. Little: But the right hon. Gentleman will take action?

Sir T. Moore: asked the Home Secretary whether he will now declare illegal all organisations and societies whose purpose is calculated to undermine the spirit of our people or their determination to win the war?

Sir J. Anderson: I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the answer given on 23rd May to a Question by the hon. Member for East Wolverhampton (Mr. Mander).

Mr. Thurtle: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is a matter of great pain to relatives of men fighting overseas now to hear members of these organisations declaring that the men have been fooled and betrayed?

NORTHERN IRELAND (DEFENCE).

Dr. Little: asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the threats from Germany regarding the independence of Northern Ireland, he will give the assurance that, in conjunction with the Government of that State, nothing will be left undone to maintain the safety and security of Northern Ireland against every enemy?

The Lord Privy Seal (Mr. Attlee): I can assure my hon. Friend that His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom, in co-operation with the Government of Northern Ireland, will see that nothing is left undone for the defence of Northern Ireland.

Dr. Little: Will my right hon. Friend definitely give the people of Northern Ireland the assurance, to-day, that they have the strength of Britain behind them in defending their land against all attacks?

AGRICULTURE.

PROTECTION OF CROPS.

Mr. De la Bère: asked the Minister of Agriculture whether, in respect of ramblers and others who frequent the countryside, he will take steps to draw their attention to, and urge on them, the necessity for special care in not damaging the crops and farmland through thought lessness?

The Minister of Agriculture (Mr. R. S. Hudson): Since the outbreak of war wireless and Press appeals have from time to time been made to ramblers and others to take special care not to cause damage to farm crops and livestock. I will gladly arrange for further appeals to be made periodically.

Mr. De la Bère: May I thank my right hon. Friend for his reply?

Mr. Marshall: Is the Minister aware that ramblers protect the crops?

FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE.

Major Carver: asked the Minister of Agriculture what capital sums have been made available for agricultural development work, since the outbreak of war, through the various schemes for supplying capital to farmers at low rates of interest?

Mr. Hudson: I am not sure what my hon. and gallant Friend has in mind in speaking of agricultural development work, but if he is thinking of permanent or semi-permanent land improvements the answer is that State assistance has been given by way of grants for ploughing up, drainage, and lime and slag, and not by way of capital loans. I have no information as to the total capital which may have been provided from private sources since the outbreak of war. If my hon. and gallant Friend has in mind the supply of requisites under the Agricultural Requisites Assistance Scheme, I would refer him to the reply given on 23rd May to the hon. Member for North Cumberland (Mr. W. Roberts).

UNUSED LAND.

Mr. Craven-Ellis: asked the Minister of Agriculture whether the local agricultural war committees throughout the country have made an estimate of the derelict land in their respective areas; what is the total area of such land; and has any scheme been prepared to cultivate same with a view of increasing food production?

Mr. Lunn: asked the Minister of Agriculture whether he is aware that there are thousands of acres of good land in this country which might be growing food, but the landlord or tenant is either unable or unwilling to make use of it for that purpose; and whether he will see that all such land is taken over by his Department under the Emergency Powers (Defence) Bill, and used for growing more food for the nation?

Mr. Hudson: The extent to which derelict land can be restored to cultivation is one of the points to which I am giving earnest attention. I can, however, give no precise figures at present.

Mr. Craven-Ellis: When my right hon. Friend gives this matter his attention will he make provision for derelict land to be cultivated by fanners who are adjacent to it?

Mr. Hudson: I have the necessary powers and propose to exercise them.

Mr. Liddall: asked the Minister of Agriculture whether his Department has yet adopted the suggestion made some months ago that idle grasslands in Sussex should be used for increased production of vegetables; whether he has made this suggestion to the Sussex county authorities; and, if not, will he do so now that the stoppage of imports of vegetables from the Low Countries can be partly remedied in the manner indicated?

Mr. Hudson: I am not sure what suggestion my hon. Friend has in mind. A proposal which originated in Sussex for the cultivation or grazing of roadside wastes was communicated to all county councils in England and Wales early in April.

Mr. Liddall: The suggestion is to bring about an increased production of vegetables. Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that the farming community are now looking to him for a lead and a drive?

Mr. Hudson: The suggestion which was circulated covered cases where waste land might be used for allotments.

Viscountess Astor: Will my right hon. Friend remind the people that vegetables are much better for them than beer?

FARM WORKERS' WAGES.

Mr. J. Morgan: asked the Minister of Agriculture whether he is aware that the suggested minimum wage of 42s. a week for farm workers now under consideration by the Central Wages Board will not be a sufficient inducement for the retention of skilled labour on the farms; and what further action does he propose should be taken to ensure that the maximum number of men shall be retained on the farms for crop cultivation?

Mr. Hudson: The general position with regard to the supply of agricultural labour, including the question of wages, is at present under consideration by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour and myself, and I hope it will be possible for a statement to be made very shortly.

Mr. Morgan: Are this morning's newspaper reports to be regarded as official?

Mr. Hudson: I have not had time to read this morning's papers.

Mr. Thorne: Has not the right hon. Gentleman seen the declaration in the papers to-day that the wage will be 48s.?

RACE MEETINGS.

Mr. Glenvil Hall: asked the Home Secretary whether he will consider the desirability of banning all greyhound race meetings until the end of the war?

Sir J. Anderson: Experience has proved that if workers are to maintain their efficiency for more than a very limited period, some measure of relaxation is essential and for that reason the Government have been anxious to avoid interfering unduly with facilities for sport and recreation. They have, however, kept the position constantly under review and they will not hesitate, should circumstances demand it, to impose such further restrictions on public entertainments as may be necessary.

Mr. Hall: May I ask my right hon. Friend whether he has been to one of these meetings recently, and, if so, whether he imagines that the enormous number of motor cars drawn up outside belong to the workers? Does he really think that this is a sport at all, and does he not know that in the eyes of many people it is a vested interest and a complete racket?

Sir J. Anderson: I am afraid that I cannot match the length of the question with my answer. I have been in close consultation with my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour on these matters.

Sir P. Harris: Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind the appalling sacrifices that are being made by men overseas, and does he not consider that it must be very irritating to them that this great extravagance should go on while the tragedy overseas is taking place?

Sir J. Anderson: I agree that that is an important consideration, but it is one only of a number of considerations which have to be taken into account. I must be guided by the opinions of some of my colleagues who are in a better position to judge the effect on the workers than I am.

Mr. Hall: Do I understand that the Home Secretary is considering vested interests in this matter?

Sir J. Anderson: Certainly not.

Colonel Sir Charles MacAndrew: Does my right hon. Friend not think it is most unsuitable at the present time that serious news on the wireless about the war should be followed by horseracing results?

Sir J. Anderson: That is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Information.

Viscountess Astor: Does the right hon. Gentleman know that this shocks the men who are fighting; that I have seen some of them who have come home and that they are horrified?

WAGES REGULATION.

Sir Granville Gibson: asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will, as a precaution against inflation, now arrange for joint control by the Ministry of Supply and the Ministry of Labour of all wages problems, so as to avoid hurried considerations of wages schemes with revisions at the last moment?

The Chancellor of the Exchequer (Sir Kingsley Wood): My right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour and National Service is giving urgent attention to the arrangements for wage regulation in order to see how far special action is desirable in association with or in addition to the joint machinery which exists in the majority of industries. In his consideration of this subject he is in consultation with the Consultative Committee appointed by the British Employers' Confederation and the Trades Union Congress General Council.

J. HENRY SCHRODER AND COMPANY.

Captain Shaw: asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer why the firm of J. Henry Schroder and Company are still amongst those firms authorised to sign Form B giving permission to transfer bearer securities under the Order, dated 13th May, 1940, of the Trading with the Enemy Act, 1939, Defence (Finance) Regulations, 1939; and whether, in view of the fact that the senior partner of this firm is a naturalised German, and that another partner was associated with the recent appeal for funds for German prisoners, he will either withdraw the authority or use his powers to place some British chartered


accountants in control of this firm to investigate past and present dealings?

Sir K. Wood: This firm has been established here as merchant bankers for over 100 years and enjoys the highest credit. The senior partner was naturalised 25 years ago, and as I have already informed my hon. Friend, whilst I regard the association of one of the partners with the appeal he refers to as unnecessary and undesirable, I see no reason to take the course of action which he suggests.

Captain Shaw: Is my right hon. Friend aware that this firm fills up these forms and signs them, and does he not think it would be better if the whole of this work were handed over to the Public Trustee?

Sir K. Wood: No, Sir, I have confidence that this firm is carrying out its duties quite properly.

CZECHO-SLOVAKIA (FINANCIAL CLAIMS).

Mr. White: asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what progress has been made in settling claims made under the Czecho-Slovakia (Financial Claims) Act?

Sir K. Wood: Payments in respect of interest due on the Czecho-Slovak State Loan of 1922, the City of Greater Prague Loan and the Skoda Works Debentures and payments in respect of claims made by the trustees of the Austrian Loan of 1934 have been made and are being made as and when amounts become due.
As regards the miscellaneous financial claims, some difficult questions have arisen and the number of cases has greatly exceeded expectation. Most of the questions arising at this stage have however now been cleared up and I hope that it will very shortly be possible to commence making payments in respect of accepted claims.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, OFFICIAL REPORT.

Mr. Mander: asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether he is now able to state what action is being taken as a result of the Report by the Select Committee on Publications and Debates Reports, recommending that

certain steps should be taken to increase the circulation of the Official Report through the British Broadcasting Corporation, by advertising and by circulars to libraries, clubs, societies and educative institutions?

The Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Captain Crookshank): Consideration of the committee's recommendations has been deferred for the time being.

MINISTRY OF SUPPLY.

PAPER PRODUCTION.

Dr. Little: asked the Minister of Supply whether, in view of the threatened shortage of paper, he will make arrangements whereby soft-wood trees over the country, suitable for making paper-pulp, should be utilised as far as possible for paper production?

The Minister of Supply (Mr. Herbert Morrison): In general the bulk of the available supply of home-grown softwood is already earmarked for the production of mining timber and essential requirements other than paper. The possibility, however, of using "waste" softwood for the production of pulp for paper making is being examined, and I have asked for a report on it at the earliest possible date.

SCRAP METAL.

Mr. Noel-Baker: asked the Minister of Supply whether he has considered using as scrap-iron the unnecessary railings in the squares of London and other cities and towns?

Mr. H. Morrison: I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply which I gave yesterday to a Question on the same subject by the hon. Member for the Broxtowe Division of Nottingham (Mr. Cocks).

Mr. Thorne: If the Minister is aware of any German tanks knocking about will he "pinch" them and put them in the melting pot?

Viscountess Astor: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the case of the railings in St. James's Square? There is an air raid shelter there, and if the railings were taken down it would make it much easier for people to get to it.

Mr. H. Morrison: I will ask my Department to call the attention of the First Commissioner of Works to that point.

INDUSTRIAL CO-ORDINATION (SCOTLAND).

Mr. J. J. Davidson: asked the Minister of Supply what steps have been taken to co-ordinate and encourage Scottish industries engaged in the production of essential supplies?

Mr. H. Morrison: As regards munitions and similar production, there is an active area organisation in Glasgow to deal with the co-ordination and encouragement of industry.

MACHINE GUNS.

Mr. Garro Jones: asked the Minister of Supply whether he is satisfied that all available world supplies of machine guns of suitable 303 types have been thoroughly investigated?

Mr. H. Morrison: I am satisfied that all suitable steps have been taken, and continue to be taken, to investigate all possible sources of supply of machine guns of suitable types.

Mr. Garro Jones: Is the Minister aware that the Ministry of Supply has been satisfied about everything for the last six months, and will he make sure that the satisfaction which has been reported to him is not part of the general complacency of that Department?

Mr. Morrison: I cannot answer for the Ministry of Supply during the last six months.

FOOD SUPPLIES.

SUGAR AND BUTTER RATIONS.

Captain Plugge: asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether he is aware that large numbers of people will waive taking their rations of sugar and butter if an appeal is made to them; and whether he will consider making such an appeal?

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food (Mr. Boothby): I am well aware of the readiness of the general public to make such a sacrifice in the public interest and should the necessity arise my Noble Friend would not hesitate to make an appeal on the lines suggested by my hon. and gallant Friend. The need has frequently been stressed for strict economy in the use of foodstuffs generally and for the avoidance of waste.

Sir Francis Fremantle: Will my hon. Friend remember that if he were to make an appeal of that sort very often the more conscientious type of people would starve themselves, and that this would have a worse effect upon the nutrition of the people?

Mr. Boothby: Yes, Sir.

MEAT AND LIVESTOCK OFFICERS (APPOINTMENTS).

Mr. Lyons: asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food on whose recommendation a stockbroker and a wine merchant, respectively, were appointed area meat and livestock officers; by what method these appointments were made; and whether the present salary of £1,000 a year in each case was the commencing salary?

Mr. Boothby: The officers mentioned were among those appointed on a designate basis by the Food (Defence Plans) Department before the war after the most careful consideration of a large number of nominations obtained from various sources. One was originally a deputy area meat and livestock officer and was appointed to his present post recently on the resignation through ill-health of an area meat and livestock officer. No salary was paid in either case for services rendered prior to the war. On the outbreak of war the salary was fixed at £950 per annum, which was in creased to £1,000 per annum on 15th January last. Experience has shown that the selections made have been thoroughly justified.

Mr. Lyons: Will my hon. Friend tell me on whose recommendation these appointments were made, and by whom were these two wholly unqualified gentlemen put into these very highly paid posts; and will he call for a general review of the whole situation in the light of these extraordinary circumstances?

Mr. Boothby: I do not accept my hon. Friend's statement that these gentlemen are unqualified, and I do not think I can accede to his request. I have made careful examination into these cases and we are quite satisfied that these gentlemen have discharged their duties very well.

Mr. Lyons: May I ask my hon. Friend—

Mr. Speaker: rose—

Mr. Lyons: Owing to the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I will raise this Question on the Adjournment at the first convenient opportunity.

MILK AND BUTTER (SCOTLAND).

Mr. Kennedy: asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether he has considered complaints from fanners and the grocery trade in the North of Scotland regarding the reduction of the butter ration from eight to four ounces; whether he is aware that large quantities of butter are going to waste every week in Scotland; and whether he proposes to make any arrangement for the collection and marketing of the surplus milk and butter now being wasted?

Mr. Boothby: I have no evidence that large quantities of butter are going to waste in Scotland. While every effort has been made to enable farm butter-makers to dispose of their output, it is appreciated that in certain local areas surpluses may still exist. In these circumstances, divisional food officers have been authorised to take steps where necessary to enable surplus production being made available for consumption.

PROPAGANDA FILMS.

Captain Plugge: asked the Minister of Information whether he is aware that there is much unemployment in the film industry at the present time; how many propaganda films are being now made with Government assistance and support; and whether, in view of the need for propaganda films, he will consider increasing these?

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Information (Mr. Harold Nicolson): The answer to the first part of the Question is in the affirmative. Before the recent intensification of hostilities, the Ministry of Information had commissioned 60 films of various kinds and were helping a number of film production companies by the grant of facilities and official approval. Some of the films commissioned were inappropriate to the present crisis and have been temporarily abandoned, but it is hoped that others of a more suitable character will take their

place. Further plans for dealing with the present situation are now under consideration.

DEER FORESTS (CULTIVATION).

Mr. Leslie: asked the Secretary of State for Scotland (1) whether he is aware that there are 3,430,000 acres of land in Scotland devoted to deer; and whether, in view of the loss of food supplies from Denmark and Holland, he will consider the advisability of utilising these deer forests for arable and pasturage farming;
(2) whether he will consider the extension of crofters' holdings and the acquisition of land now under deer to the thousands of applicants for land settlement and that help be given by money and equipment grants, as in the case of Luskintyre, when new holders, in order to stock land formerly under deer, were granted State loans?

The Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Westwood): My hon. Friend will appreciate that the acquisition of land for holdings and their constitution and equipment, especially in the case of deer forests, are processes requiring much time and material, and I regret that, under present conditions, it is not practicable to make funds available for this purpose. As I stated in reply to a Question by the hon. Member for Clackmannan and East Stirlingshire (Mr. Woodburn) on 21st May, instructions and guidance have been given to agricultural executive committees in the Highland counties with a view to securing the full utilisation of the grazing capacity of deer forests, and steps have been taken in certain cases to enable townships of crofters to obtain additional grazing on sporting lands. I should be glad to hear of any special cases of difficulty which my hon. Friend may wish to bring to my notice, but he will, I am sure, realise that the vital considerations at the present time are the production of more food and the efficient organisation of our resources in men and materials for victory.

Mr. Leslie: Would my hon. Friend call for a report as to the speeding up of the matters that he has mentioned, and is he aware that more than 2,000,000 acres of these deer forests were at one time under cultivation and could be utilised again?

Mr. Westwood: I am aware of the facts which are stated in the question by the hon. Member. Every endeavour is being made to speed up the full utilisation of our land to give us the best result possible for the victory which we desire.

Mr. Maxton: Is the hon. Member recollecting, when he says that the acquisition of land is necessarily slow, that this House granted to this Government emergency powers to deal with all property that was necessary to be acquired for national purposes? I would cite the Minister of Labour again, who operated his powers in transferring the use of labour on the following day; will those who are interested in the acquisition of property act with similar expedition?

Mr. Westwood: The powers referred to by the hon. Member are well known to those at the Scottish Office at the present moment.

POSTAGE RATES

(ARMED FORCES).

Sir T. Moore: asked the Postmaster-General whether the increased postage rates will be payable in respect of letters to serving soldiers, airmen and sailors in the Near East, India, Gibraltar, Malta, China and home stations, respectively?

The Assistant Postmaster-General (Captain Waterhouse): There has been no increase in the rates of postage on correspondence for His Majesty's Forces and ships abroad. The current inland rates are, however, payable on letters to members of the Forces serving at home or with His Majesty's ships in home waters. In this connection, I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the answer given to the hon. Member for Western Fife (Mr. Gallacher) on 28th May by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

QUESTIONS TO MINISTERS.

Mr. Garro Jones: On a point of Order. I would respectfully ask you, Mr. Speaker, whether, in a case in which a Minister has a Question addressed to him and diverts that Question to another Minister, under a misapprehension, you have power to order that that Question shall be readdressed to the Minister to whom it was originally addressed on the Order Paper? I am referring in particular to Question 102:

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Aircraft Production whether, having in view the superiority of our leading types of aircraft and the comparative immunity from attack at night and in conditions of low visibility of bomber types with a lower performance and simpler construction and equipment, he is fully satisfied that our, and world, sources of supply of such aircraft are being promptly and adequately exploited,
which is primarily a tactical question and therefore is addressed to the Secretary of State for Air. I am put into contact with the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Aircraft Production who cannot possibly move in the matter until the overriding tactical question is decided. I therefore ask you whether I may not have my Question readdressed to the Minister to whom I put it?

Mr. Speaker: If the Question relates to a matter for which the Air Ministry is primarily responsible, certainly the hon. Member may have his Question readdressed to the Secretary of State for Air.

Vice-Admiral Taylor: On a point of Order. May I ask for your Ruling, Mr. Speaker, whether I would now be in order, in view of the unsatisfactory reply I received to Question 34, in giving notice that I will raise the matter on the Adjournment?

Mr. Speaker: The hon. and gallant Member should have done that at the time.

Sir William Davison: May I ask your guidance, Mr. Speaker, as to the advisability or otherwise of putting on the Order Paper Questions which are likely to be of assistance to the enemy? Cannot something be done to prevent it, in view of the correspondence which hon. Members receive from Britons living abroad, pointing out the great harm which is done by Questions and Supplementary Questions in the House of Commons?

Mr. Speaker: I should not like to undertake the task myself, but a Minister can always refuse to answer Questions on the ground of public interest.

WASTE (SALVAGE).

Mr. R. C. Morrison: (by Private Notice) asked the Minister of Supply whether he can now make any statement as to the steps he proposes to take to improve the collection of salvage?

Mr. H. Morrison: Yes, Sir. I have decided to invite all women Members of this House to serve as a committee to advise me as to further steps which should be taken in this connection. The Chairman of the Committee will be the hon. Member for Anglesey (Miss Lloyd George) and the Vice-Chairmen will be the hon. Members for Dartford (Mrs. Adamson) and Wall send (Miss Ward). The further encouragement of public interest in the collection of salvage is very desirable and I have appointed a public relations officer in the Ministry of Supply who, among other matters, will give special attention to this aspect of the work of the Ministry.

Sir P. Harris: Will this committee of our women colleagues have any executive power or will the right hon. Gentleman appoint an executive officer under them who can take action, because a long time has already elapsed since this matter was originally raised in the House?

Mr. H. Morrison: The committee will be in contact with the appropriate executive officer at the Ministry. They will have a secretary appointed. While they must necessarily be advisory, I shall, of course, pay the greatest attention to any recommendations which this committee of women Members of the House may make.

Mrs. Hardie: If this is a question for the local authorities may I ask whether the local authorities are carrying out their duties, and, if not, why not insist upon their doing so?

Mr. H. Morrison: The local authorities have certain duties or certain obligations and, if necessary, compulsory powers can be used, but I think it will commend itself to the House that there should be a committee of the women Members, who can form, in my judgment, a very suitable instrument for the purpose of pushing this business on.

Sir Herbert Williams: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, three months ago, an invitation was conveyed to the women Members of this House to tender evidence to a Select Committee and that, up to now, they have failed to take advantage of that invitation?

Mr. H. Morrison: That; question must be referred to the women Members of the House.

Mr. J. J. Davidson: Will those women Members of the committee be in a position to advise the Minister as to action to be taken with regard to local authorities?

Mr. H. Morrison: Most certainly.

Sir F. Sanderson: Is the Minister aware that a model plant can be inspected at Ealing?

Mr. A. Bevan: Is the Minister satisfied that it is a good principle to appoint committees on sex qualifications, and would he like to commit himself to the statement that an ordinary working-class Member of this House knows less about garbage than the hon. Lady the Member for the Sutton Division of Plymouth (Viscountess Astor)?

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

Mr. Lees-Smith: Will the Lord Privy Seal state the business of the House for next week?

Mr. Attlee: The business will be:

Tuesday—Second Reading of the following Bills:—

Post Office and Telegraph,

Superannuation Scheme (War Service),

National Service (Channel Islands) [Lords].

Evidence and Powers of Attorney [Lords].

Wednesday—Motion to approve the Old Age and Widows' Pensions Draft Regulations. Committee stage of a Ways and Means Resolution relating to the raising of the rate of Excess Profits Tax to 100per cent., and further progress with the Bills announced for consideration on Tuesday.

Thursday—Committee stage of the Finance Bill.

Mr. Lees-Smith: I take it that, if any special circumstances make it necessary, this programme can be adjusted next week?

Mr. Attlee: Certainly, Sir.

Resolved,
That this House, at its rising this day, do adjourn till Tuesday nejrt."—[MR. ATTLEE.]

BILLS REPORTED.

MINISTRY OF HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDER (LITTLESTONE-ON-SEA AND DISTRICT WATER) BILL.

Reported, with Amendments, from the Committee on Unopposed Bills.

Bill, as amended, to be considered upon Tuesday next.

MINISTRY OF HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDER (THIRSK DISTRICT WATER) BILL.

Reported, with Amendments, from the Committee on Unopposed Bills.

Bill, as amended, to be considered upon Tuesday next.

MINISTRY OF HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDER (NORWICH) BILL.

Reported, without Amendment, from the Committee on Unopposed Bills.

Bill to be read the Third time upon Tuesday next.

SOUTH SUBURBAN GAS BILL [LORDS].

Reported, with Amendments, from the Committee on Unopposed Bills (with Report on the Bill).

Bill, as amended, and Report to lie upon the Table; Report to be printed.

TAUNTON CORPORATION BILL.

Reported, with Amendments, from the Committee on Unopposed Bills (with Report on the Bill).

Bill, as amended, and Report to lie upon the Table; Report to be printed.

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.

That they have agreed to,—

National Loans (No. 2) Bill, without Amendment.

That they have passed a Bill, intituled, "An Act to provide for the enlistment of men called up in the Channel Islands for service in the armed forces of the Crown." [National Service (Channel Islands) Bill [Lords.]

And also a Bill, intituled, "An Act to amend the Marriage Notice (Scotland) Act, 1878, in its application to persons engaged in war service."[Marriage (Scotland) (Emergency Provisions) Bill [Lords.]

NATIONAL SERVICE (CHANNEL ISLANDS) BILL [Lords].

Read the First time; to be read a Second time upon Tuesday next, and to be printed. [Bill 56.]

NATIONAL EXPENDITURE.

Sir John Wardlaw-Milne reported from the Select Committee, pursuant to the Order of the House [29th May], That the Co-ordinating Sub-Committee of the Select Committee had addressed a memorandum to the Prime Minister for the consideration of the War Cabinet.

Report to lie upon the Table.

Orders of the Day — SUPPLY.

[9TH Allotted Day.]

Considered in Committee.

[Sir Dennis Herbert in the Chair.]

CIVIL ESTIMATES, 1940.

CLASS VI.

BOARD OF TRADE.

Motion made, and Question proposed,
That a sum, not exceeding £297,034, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1941, for the salaries and expenses of the office of the Committee of Privy Council for Trade, and subordinate departments." [Note: £148,000 has been voted on account.]

3.54 p.m.

The President of the Board of Trade (Sir Andrew Duncan): I am very conscious of the deep interest which hon. Members in all parts of the House have been taking in the development of the export trade, not only as a means for conserving and adding to our financial resources, but also as a means for laying a real foundation for the post-war activities of our industries. I think it would be wise that I should deal to-day with those aspects of the Board of Trade work which bear upon the export problem. Many of the economic activities which fall within the administrative functions of the Board of Trade in peace time are transferred to other and separate Departments in war time, but the closest liaison is maintained by the Board of Trade with these Departments so that, in any decisions that are taken, considerations that bear upon our overseas trade may be taken fully into account.

The Chairman: I rather expected to have a question addressed to me as to the other two Votes which are on the Order Paper to be taken to-day, and it seems, from the right hon. Gentleman's opening, that the Committee may think it advisable that the discussion on the Question which I have put from the Chair should be allowed to range over the other two Votes as well. That is not an uncommon practice, provided it receives the general assent of the Committee. [Hon. Members: "Agreed."]

Sir A. Duncan: On the Export Council, to which I shall refer later, we have representatives—highly placed officers—of six Government Departments. We have the Treasury, the Foreign Office, the Ministry of Economic Warfare, the Raw Materials Section of the Ministry of Supply, the Ministry of Shipping and the Economic Survey. Their contributions to our deliberations are of the greatest service to us. In addition, the Board of Trade are kept in the closest touch with the purchasing programmes of the Ministry of Food and the Ministry of Supply, as well as with the purchases which the Ministry of Economic Warfare may make for pre-emptive purposes. In this way our buying power is brought to the aid of our export possibilities as fully as it can be within the limiting factors which are bound to surround these purchases in war-time. In present circumstances exchange and economic warfare questions enter so much into the field of trade agreements, which normally is in the province of the Board of Trade, that close inter-departmental contact with the Treasury and the Ministry of Economic Warfare is essential.
Whatever may be the exact nature or form of these trade agreements—and they cover a very wide field to-day—it is the duty and the function of the Board of Trade to see that sterling credits are earmarked to the fullest extent for expenditure in the United Kingdom and the sterling area, and that imports are, as far as possible, paid for by increased exports, visible or invisible. But our liaison arrangements go further still. We have the closest arrangement with the Ministry of Supply, particularly in regard to the raw material controls. These arrangements enable us to ensure that where necessary the raw material requirements of the export trade shall be given precedence over less important home civilian requirements, and indeed that export trade shall be given fair consideration in relation to Service requirements. There is a priority organisation to which we can appeal. Under these arrangements too, the Board of Trade are enabled to guide the raw materials into the more highly finished products for export. Processing and manufacturing add to the value of the raw materials, and in our exports our aim is to secure the highest possible exchange value. Inasmuch, too, as the


Board of Trade administer both import and export licences, they are in close liaison with both the Ministry of Supply and the Food Ministry.
The Committee is aware of the general reasons for export and import licences. I do not propose to go into details on these to-day, but just to say that the main purpose of import restrictions is to conserve our resources of foreign exchange and shipping by restricting our purchases from overseas of non-essential and of luxury goods or goods of which we have sufficient supplies at home. It is our general policy to grant licences freely for raw materials or for goods which are being imported for the purpose of being processed or manufactured into the more highly finished goods for export and which cannot be obtained here. There has been throughout these liaison arrangements and in the work of the Department generally a constant preoccupation that our machinery should be so fashioned and adapted that we contribute to the utmost extent to the enlargement of the scope of opportunity for the export trade. We have made it equally our constant pre-occupation that we should maintain and develop that sympathy and understanding with the trading community without which it would be quite impossible for us to achieve the maximum of export trade; and in February last, as the Committee knows, we set up an Export Council. On that Export Council, besides the Departmental representation, we have industry, commerce, labour and banking all represented, and two of the textile controllers as well. The day-to-day work of the Council is carried on by an Executive Committee, consisting of the business members of the Council, who are giving their full time voluntarily to this service, and I take the opportunity of expressing high appreciation of the most valuable and public-spirited service which they are giving. Already we have 120 export groups, and added energy has been imparted to the conduct of the export trade, both in manufacturing and in merchanting.
Within the Board of Trade, the executive members of the Export Council have at their disposal the services of the Industrial Supplies Department, which my predecessor set up in November, and the

Overseas Trade Department. In addition they have the services of Board of Trade representatives on the Area Supply Boards in the provinces; these representatives are also experienced business people who are giving their time voluntarily. The export groups form the channel of communication between individual firms in industry and the Export Council, and through them all problems relating to the allocation either of raw materials or of plant capacity are dealt with. They also consider in general the needs of any section of industry in relation to labour supply. But the sphere of usefulness of these export groups and the Export Council is not in any sense limited, and we have had many instances of recommendations being made through the export groups for modifications both in service and commercial specifications with a view to economising our use of raw materials where they are in short supply. Necessity makes for invention, and as an example I mention to the Committee a modification which in this way was very readily accepted by the Ministry of Supply in the specifications for Army boots. As a result of this modification, which did not affect the serviceability of the boots, raw material has been made available for export purposes, and the saving in this single instance alone will permit exports to the value of from £500,000 to £750,000 a year which would not otherwise have been possible. The groups have been of great assistance also in helping to concentrate the export of raw material in the form of more highly finished products rather than in the form of less manufactured products, and they have co-operated very fully indeed in directing production towards export rather than into the home market, even though the export trade has in some cases been, unhappily, much less profitable.
It is true to say that for the most part there are ample markets available in the export field, and we have had the fullest support of national trade organisations in urging upon the commercial community the need to quote firm prices wherever possible. It is recognised that in certain sections of industry the price element is becoming of growing importance and that concerted action will need to be taken—I refer in particular to the cotton industry—to assure the exploitation of markets to the fullest extent. This is a


matter to which the executive members of the Export Council, along with the Cotton Board and the cotton industry, are giving immediate attention. The solution of commercial problems must vary from industry to industry, but I believe that in the machinery which we have evolved and are evolving appropriate remedies, bearing on what are essentially practical problems, can be found and will be found. From the series of visits which I have paid to the provincial centres, as well as from deputations which I have met there and in London, I feel very confident indeed that the trading community are keen to assist in this form of national service, and there is a determination to exhaust every possibility of finding business solutions for business questions. It is, in particular, recognised that if a proper foundation is to be laid for postwar trade, competitive efficiency and sales efficiency must be developed to the greatest possible extent.
To-day the Overseas Trade Department is working as an integral part of the Board of Trade organisation. With its contacts throughout the world and with the reports received at short intervals from its officers in every part of the world, it is able to keep the export groups in touch with broad general trends. It has also negotiated simpler procedure for facilitating visits of business men and commercial agents abroad from this country and to this country from abroad, and it has helped to reduce the delays in the censorship of business correspondence, catalogues and samples. The Department have taken the opportunity of the continuation of the New York World's Fair greatly to enlarge the exhibit of British products in that Fair, so that it now includes practically every product that is exported from this country to the United States.
In the sphere of financing export trade, the Export Credits Guarantee Department have enlarged the facilities available to the business community in respect of the greater risks that arise in war-time. A new transfer risks policy has been issued expressly covering the risk of non-payment owing to war or other catastrophe developing in the buyer's country. The proportion of the transfer risk which the Department guarantees is 90 per cent. Apart from risk of non-payment for goods

delivered, there is, of course, the further risk that arises of loss to the exporter in respect of goods that are completed or partly completed and cannot be shipped because of some catastrophic development in the country that would have taken them, and here again it has been decided that a new form of policy shall be made available, as from to-morrow. With these pre-shipment risks covered, I think it can now be said that this far-reaching scheme of insurance should enable the exporters to accept export orders with every confidence, since practically every contingency arising outside the United Kingdom is covered.
There is another aspect of our policy to which I must refer. In April last the Board of Trade issued an Order restricting the quantities of cotton rayon and linen made-up goods and piece goods which could be supplied to the home market. The restriction was designed to help our export trade in those products by withdrawing raw materials from home purposes. Manufacturers of piece goods and makers-up of garments have co-operated, both individually and through their organisations, in making that scheme a success. This limitation Order was intended only as a beginning, and it has been generally recognised that restriction of other products would be necessary. The emergency which has now arisen makes it imperative that home consumption should be reduced further than would have been necessary by reason only of the increase in export trade, and in any further action now to be taken this aspect will be borne in mind.
As to trade figures, I will not dwell on what was or was not done during the period 1914–18. The circumstances were in any case in many essential respects different, but I will make this broad statement, that at no time in the four years did exports reach in volume, or approximate even in volume, to those of the immediately preceding pre-war year, and only in one year out of those four years did the exports even reach, in spite of the increase of prices, in value the prewar figure of 1913. Contrast with that the fact that for the first two months of this year our exports did reach in value to the same level that they had attained in the corresponding two months of last year, and in the months of March and April our export trade approximated to


within 2 per cent. in volume of the export trade that had been done in March and April of last year. These are very encouraging figures, keeping in mind the fact that, owing to the extent to which the heavy industries are engaged in war work, the great metal groups of our exporting industries cannot play their normal part at the present time in the export field. It means that there must have been a very considerable speed-up in the export of other commodities. During April, in value, cotton goods reached their highest figures since 1937; woollen goods, other textiles, pottery and glass had higher exports than for at least 10 years; cutlery, hardware, electrical goods and apparatus, chemicals and drugs had higher exports than they had had for 20 years. I am not overlooking the gap between exports and imports. Even if allowance is made for the fact that the trade figures do not take into account the invisible exports, it is still very big indeed. But even so I think I am entitled to say that our exporting interests have, in March and April at least, made the beginning of a very creditable performance.
The Committee will no doubt have in mind the fact that the situation with which we are faced in the export field is not static. With the invasion of Norway and Denmark, and the consequent inaccessibility of the Baltic trading area, which includes Sweden and Finland, we lost markets which represented 10 per cent. of our normal exports. With the further invasion of Holland and Belgium, we have lost an additional 5 per cent. It is quite true that these same events afford us still greater opportunity in other markets, from which the invaded countries are themselves excluded, but the switch-over takes time, even if it can be done 100 per cent. Unfortunately, even more serious modifications and adjustments in our export position are called for by the necessity for the country to meet the fullest onslaught of the enemy now. What is appropriate to a long-term plan, when the maximum effort is to come at a later period in a long war, is not appropriate when you have a short-term policy, or when the maximum effort must be made immediately. Every resource must now be concentrated upon the immediate production of armaments, which are so urgently required. Just as there will be alterations of programme within the field of munition production itself, so we must be prepared to turn a

great deal of the effort which is now engaged in the development of export trade into making munitions at home. On the other hand, efforts must be still more intensified in connection with exports where skill and capacity are specialised to a particular end and cannot be diverted to munitions, and also where we have raw materials under our own control, as in the case of coal. I hope that such steps as my hon. Friend will be able to take will result in such an increase in the production of coal that we shall be assured of developing the markets which we have had in the past, and which we hope still to hold.
The time has come when neither our capital resources nor exportable goods can be used for purchasing imports for home consumption beyond the absolute necessities of our population. Apart from the need for directing the present export drive to some extent into munitions production, we shall need to direct material and labour from the production of goods for unnecessary consumption at home into the production of goods for export. Fortunately for the orderly rearrangements which we need to make in the export drive, we have available the efficient and flexible machinery of the Export Council and the export groups. Full use will be made of that machinery, so that we may be sure that, however we may need to withdraw here and expand there for immediate war purposes, the ultimate expansion of our export trade all along the line will be assured both as a war measure and as a foundation for national recovery after the war. I make no apology, even in the situation of to-day, for emphasising still the need for concentrating on export trade, where that can be done without endangering our efforts in the war. I hope that as this Committee has given its support in the past, so it will now, to the development of our export trade, and that throughout the country the manufacturing and industrial community will realise that, in so far as they are not engaged in armament production the onus is placed upon them now no less than it has been hitherto of prosecuting our export trade to the utmost extent.

4.21 p.m.

Sir Herbert Williams: It is my privilege to congratulate the right hon. Gentleman, first, on the very clear exposition which he has given us


to-day of the work of the Export Council, and, in addition, upon his maiden speech in this House. [Hon. Members: "No."] I was wrong. I have been misled by an organ of the Press, which said yesterday that this performance would be his maiden speech, and went on to hint that in that case I should have some statistics bearing on the fact. I have gone into the Statistics, and I find that one baby out of 100,000 babies that are born sits on the Front Bench, but that only one in 5,000,000 ever makes a maiden speech from that Box.
I am very grateful for the information which the right hon. Gentleman has given us about the work of the Export Council. I was also very interested in what he said about the revision of specifications. Hon. Members will be aware of the second report of the Select Committee on National Expenditure, on which I am privileged to serve. In that report we devoted considerable attention to the importance of the Service Departments revising their specifications, so that when buying for war purposes they should buy those things that are more immediately available, so adapting themselves to war circumstances. In that report we were not concerned with export trade, but I am glad that the same principle is being adopted in connection with export trade. I would suggest the desirability of the Board of Trade linking up with supply officers in the various war Departments who are engaged in dealing with the problem of specifications. The right hon. Gentleman also made a reference to the limitation order in respect of supplies of goods for the home market. Here is a direction in which I would ask him to move with some care. The immediate effect of the announcement of the last order of that kind was a certain amount of panic buying. It is very important not to create in the minds of the public the idea that they will not be able to buy certain things in the future, because that will lead to a rush of people to the shops to buy such goods, to the prejudice of other members of the public.
The right hon. Gentleman was good enough to widen the picture contained in the Board of Trade Returns, by giving us some indication of the trade situation. I am grateful for that. On account of price variations, we are all in the dark as to the real situation. Frankly, I am

doubtful whether we gain very much by having reduced the Board of Trade Returns from the bulky volume that we used to have to this tiny document. The object, of course, is to deprive the enemy of information. I wonder whether, as a matter of fact, there is much advantage in so doing when at the same time we deprive the whole trading community of this country of much of the information that they need to guide them in their trade policy. I have discussed this privately with the right hon. Gentleman. I do not know what his present state of mind is, but I think it would be helpful to the trading community if they were given more knowledge than they now have. We have not the faintest knowledge of whom we are trading with, or the amount of that trade. The enemy can derive a good deal of information from the study of the trade statistics of those countries which are neutral, although they will not get the information quite so promptly; but we are kept in the dark. If we are to test the efficiency of the policy of the Government, we ought to have the necessary knowledge, and I would ask the right hon. Gentleman to consider, with his advisers and, of course, the War Cabinet, whether we cannot have more detailed information, so that we ourselves may know where we are making advances and where we are not, and what we ought to do.
I have tried to obtain some picture of the volume of our trade. The only information that I have is the Board of Trade index numbers for wholesale prices, which are still published in the "Board of Trade Journal." I came to the conclusion that our exports in April, which amounted to just over £48,000,000 in value would, in the terms of prices of last year, have been worth about £35,000,000; so, roughly speaking, the exports in April this year were about the same in volume as those for April last year. I realise that the index number for home prices is different from that for our export trade, and that, therefore, my calculation is a crude one. Actually, I gather from the right hon. Gentleman's speech that the situation is rather better than my calculation would have led me to believe. Imports have gone up startlingly, from £70,000,000 in April last year to £110,000,000 in April this year. By my figure, which I know is not strictly


accurate, they have gone up in quantity from £70,000,000 to the equivalent of about £80,000,000. The more detailed information at the disposal of the Board of Trade may give a more favourable picture. The quantity of goods represents our needs, but the value of the goods is what we have to pay for.
I note that there has been a disturbing increase in the adverse balance of visible trade. If you take the first four months of this year, the difference between the imports and the total exports comes to £235,000,000; while the figure for the first four months of last year was £115,000,000, so we are worse off to the extent of £120,000,000. On the other hand, the bulk of our invisibles are still there. In some cases, I think they will be larger. Rubber companies, tin companies and others are probably doing better as a result of this war; and profits from them constitute a large part of our invisible imports. The shipping figures also have shown some expansion. It is a difficult picture to follow, but I should think that on balance our invisible items are greater this year than they were last year, and that, therefore, the real increase in our adverse balance is something less than £120,000,000. Perhaps we may call it £100,000,000. Last year we were on an even keel; and, therefore, this represents £100,000,000 of credits that we have to get somewhere or other, either by disposing of our gold reserves or by selling our overseas securities. The great problem that the right hon. Gentleman has to face is that of relieving the Chancellor of the Exchequer of this terrible problem. In the meantime, we have to depend on our own resources.
The position is disturbed and made difficult to calculate by the fact that Scandinavia, Belgium and Holland are now no longer trading areas so far as we are concerned. They are countries from which we imported far more than they imported from us. Their elimination superficially improves our adverse trade balance, because it forces upon us that reduction in consumption about which the right hon. Gentleman was talking. Hitler has been far more influential in bringing about that result than appeals of right hon. Gentlemen, including my right hon. Friend opposite. If reduction in consumption is forced upon us in future, if, for example, we only have avail-

able about one-third of the paper previously consumed, it is obviously unnecessary to make any appeals as the stuff will not be there, and that will be the end of the argument. I rather wonder whether these appeals to abstain from purchasing are always well conceived. I put to the Lord Chancellor, when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer, this question. That morning I had gone down Victoria Street, and having passed a shop advertising a lot of shirts for sale at reduced prices, and having abstained from taking advantage of that offer because I was in a hurry, I asked him in what way I had helped the export trade? I did not get an answer. I do not think there was an answer. If the exports had taken the place of things that were in short supply in this country, the consumer would not be able to buy. If things have been made and delivered to the shops, I do not think that we are serving any particular purpose in asking the public not to buy them. We ought to be clear in our minds when we start to give instructions to the public.
The Export Council seems to be getting to work vigorously. The President of the Board of Trade said that 120 groups are in being. I belong to one of the groups. They appointed an executive committee, of which, I am glad to say, I am not a member. I heard recently how they were getting on, and I wished them good luck. They are all filled with the right spirit. These export groups are not going to export anything themselves. We must not blind our eyes to the fact that we can only export when we get orders, which is the duty of traders. My right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade cannot do it, and his colleague the Secretary to the Overseas Trade Department cannot do it, but they can both do something to create conditions favourable to manufacturers and merchants who have to get the orders. You cannot get orders unless the price is right. If we run up the price in this country too much we shall not be able to export.
I appeal to my right hon. Friend to keep an eye on his colleague the Minister of Labour, who is not yet a Member of this House. I say with the greatest possible respect to the Minister of Labour, and to the Minister for Aircraft Production, that, if they first of all destroy all the human beings in this country by depriving them of holidays and making


them work week after week, Saturdays and Sundays, and all round the clock, all that production will come to naught. If this folly is persisted in too long—I speak in very plain terms because it is real folly—the effect of all this overtime will probably be that after the first enthusiasm has worn off there will certainly be no increase in production, and we shall be paying people twice as much for doing the same amount of work. In the munitions areas all checks on waste are now removed by the 100 per cent. Excess Profits Tax. We must not overlook the incredible economic disaster which may follow. Waste of every kind is now going to happen, and those whom the Government are supplying with unlimited funds to improve their output will be in a position to waste. They are not the people who are in the export trade.
The whole of our export trade push may be ruined by follies done in connection with other parts of the war effort. Therefore, I would in the strongest possible terms urge my right hon. Friend to represent to his colleagues that, in their great anxiety to get an increase in the production of munitions—in directions in which in my judgment, they will fail—they do not at the same time defeat the whole concern by which the war effort is to be sustained, namely, the export trade. Roughly speaking, under our existing system of taxation, for every pound that the Government spend on the war effort, they get about 6s. 8d. back in taxation, so that the net cost is 13s. 4d., which has to be found by all the people who are not engaged in the war effort. As they are taxed roughly in the same proportion, it means that two-thirds of the human beings in this country, unless we can sustain the war effort by borrowing, have to be engaged on work which has nothing to do with war.
That is an interesting thought. Not more than one-third of the population, as things are at the moment, and unless we can borrow from abroad to maintain the war effort, can serve in the Forces or be on munitions, and the other two-thirds have to be employed to supply their needs. People say to me, "I want to do something to help to win the war," and I ask them, "What are you doing?" They describe what they are doing, and I

say, "The best thing that you can do is to get on with your job." In the war effort there ought to be the minimum of hindrances from Government Departments. I took the liberty on the day after Budget Day to make a brief speech and referred to the administrative methods now being pursued in all Government Departments and described them as a growing scandal. I think that that was a fair description.
A prominent industrialist came to see me yesterday and said, "When are you going to get on with the war effort?" I said, "What do you mean?" He said, "You ought to shoot nine civil servants." I said, "Why?" and he replied, "Because that is the magic number. Unless you shoot some of them and stop this incredible lunacy of Government administrative departments all our efforts will be diminished." That is violent language, but it is more or less true. My right hon. Friend, to my own knowledge, is working to the limit to cut out circumlocution. I know that to be the fact, and I pay him every tribute for it. I heard a very high tribute paid to him the other day from an officer in his Department. It is almost improper for me to say this, but I am not going to mention any names. I asked him, "How do you like your new President?" and he replied, "He is a splendid man. He answers letters even before he gets them." In a certain sense, if you say the right things in the right place people do not need to write letters. That is a great tribute from a member of the Department, who will no doubt reprove me for making this improper use of private conversation, but, as I say, I will not mention any names.
I am now going to mention two cases about which my right hon. Friend knows. They are not very important individually, but they both relate to the export trade. One relates to a gentleman who lives in my constituency and makes umbrellas. The bulk of his business is the export of umbrellas. He was held up because he could not get the ribs, which are made of steel. Steel, in the form of umbrella ribs, is a magnificent export. I know that it has a very high value per ton. It was my right hon. Friend himself who told me that, if you export steel in the form of umbrella ribs, you export it at the rate of £150 per ton. That is an ideal form of export at this moment. This man


makes umbrellas for export, and he has to buy the steel ribs. As he could not get a supply of ribs I wrote to the Department of Overseas Trade on 28th February, and sent a reminder on 7th March. I received what I regarded as an ineffective reply on 12th March. I wrote a further letter to the Department on 12th April, and by chance I asked a supplementary Question of the Minister of Supply on 17th April, and on the same day wrote a letter to the Ministry of Supply, and I received a reply on 18th April, stating that the matter was one for the Board of Trade. On 19th April I wrote to my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade, and on 29th April I had the privilege of seeing him on a number of matters. He had in front of him a file containing details of this particular case. Things began to move. I afterwards thought I would find out from my constituent what was happening, and he told me that in the last three or four weeks the situation had been much better from the moment that I wrote to my right hon. Friend, and I pay him that tribute, but what about all the previous period from 28th February to 19th April, when the man who had plenty of export orders could not get the requisite permit for his steel? Even now, though the position is much better and he has the permit, he is not getting adequate deliveries.
Now a new problem arises. It is a specification problem. It is not that it is important in itself, but it illustrates the point. The same manufacturer is receiving inquiries from Uruguay for umbrellas to replace those hitherto bought from Germany. These have always been of a certain design and type and involve obtaining a section of rib which is different from the standard British section, and no one in this country is able to produce that kind of rib. Here is an opportunity for exporting umbrellas which involve a different design, or an extra special effort to induce the customer to change the nature of his demands. Though this is not a big order in itself, it illustrates a number of very important principles, and that is why I have taken a little time over it. It may only involve a few thousand pounds by itself.
The next case is a very curious one. It relates to a company with which I am personally connected. On 8th February the managing director of the company,

of which I am the chairman but not a full-time executive, was lunching with me in this building when he told me that they were reluctantly throwing away every day a certain kind of hair which was of no use to them, as the cost of recovery was such that, economically, it was cheaper to throw it away than to save it. That is one of the difficulties of salvage. The cost of saving is often more than the value of what you save, although in these times it might be of vital importance to spend say £6 in getting an export worth only £5.
Lunching in the same room was the present Minister of Food, who was then Director-General of Stores and Equipment at the Ministry of Supply. I told him about this and he was at once interested, as I knew he would be. As one of the Treasury representatives on the Special Areas Committee he said that he was going to a Special Areas Committee that afternoon and would raise the matter, as the factory is on a Special Area trading estate. H we said that he would see what he could do, and no one could have been more expeditious, for at half-past nine the next morning someone called at the works in South Wales and said that something must be done. It was arranged that the necessary plant should be erected. The scheme involves the erection of a building by the South Wales and Monmouthshire Trading Estates, Limited, which is a Government company. Special facilities are necessary if the scheme is not to involve my company in loss. What has been happening? The details have been going round between the Board of Trade and the Ministry of Supply since then for the necessary permit in order that the factory can be erected. We want to export this hair and get all this delay since 8th February. My company do not care whether the job is done or not from their own selfish point of view, but from the point of view of the national interest it ought to be done. The job has been held up for four months. It is not good enough that we should have these incredible delays.
I do not know what the experience of other hon. Members is, but my experience is that, if you write a letter to a Government Department about any ordinary thing which we ourselves would answer by return of post, you do not receive an answer within three weeks. This sort of business ought to be stopped. Civil servants are working abnormal overtime,


which is totally unnecessary, most of it, because it takes 10 people to make up the mind of one person. We can afford to allow a certain amount of this sort of thing to go on in peace-time, but it ought to be stopped in time of war. We must go a little further in mobilising our industrial effort.
There are still, or there were a month ago, at least 1,000,000 persons out of work in this country. I do not know whether my constituency can play its part in the export trade, though I hope it can. It is only a fortnight ago since I attended at the Town Hall in my constituency, a conference presided over by the Mayor, at which there were representatives of the building trades unions and of the master builders. They were in despair because they did not know in what way a large number of building trade operatives could be found employment. Croydon is typical of dozens of towns in the south-east part of England at this moment. Grave unemployment exists. I know the present Secretary of State for Scotland used to indulge in ingenious calculations which were really an analysis of figures designed to prove that not many were really out of work and always had the ardent support of the "Daily Telegraph." But that does not alter the facts. I have had people coming to see me, asking me to find them a job. Occasionally, if they were technical people I advised them to sign on at the Central Registry, that amazing department over which there ought to be the words "Abandon hope all ye who sign on here." It is the most incredible department which the State ever set up. I said three months ago that it was a scandal and ought to be put right. Whether anything has been done I do not know.
I had an interesting answer yesterday to a Question I recently put to the Minister of Labour. In the first eight months of the war period the number of entrants to unemployment insurance was 813,000. The figure for the corresponding period of the year before was 547,000, so that there has been an addition to our industrial strength of 266,000. That is apart from anything that may be shown from the drop in the live register of unemployment. We have drawn into the industrial machine more than 250,000 people over and above what we might normally have anticipated. That, I think, is an en-

couraging fact, but I would say to the right hon. Gentleman and the Parliamentary Secretary that there is still untouched a vast reservoir of employable people in this country. There is a vast army of women willing to work if there is any chance of work.
Three months ago the Prime Minister, who was then the First Lord of the Admiralty, went to Manchester and said, "We want 1,000,000 women in our factories." I think that was a deplorable statement to make at that moment. Although it was true it merely created entirely false hopes. Women crammed the Employment Exchanges and asked for jobs and the answer was that there were no jobs to be had. The other day the Minister of Aircraft Production, an old friend of mine, appealed for garage hands for aircraft work, and when there was an immediate response to that appeal there was nothing for them to do. Ministers must abstain from these emotional appeals and must be sure for what they want people before they issue their appeals. There must be organisation. After all, the function of Ministers doing their job is not self-advertisement. Lately there has been too much of people rushing to the microphone and making appeals for the war effort without taking precautions to see that if the appeal is responded to anything will happen. We shall want women in due course, but there must be organisation to prepare the way for their employment.
I have been a little nervous, Sir Dennis, that you might rule me out of order this afternoon. The practice in this House ever since I have been a Member is that if one wanted to discuss the problem of unemployment one did so on the Vote for the Ministry of Labour. Why? He has nothing to do with it. The Minister of Labour controls no policies which put people into work. He is merely a universal relieving officer and in addition has to do what he can to prevent the unfair exploitation of labour. He does not control the policy which creates employment. That is the duty of the right hon. Gentleman opposite, the Chancellor of the Exchequer and others concerned with economic matters, and I hope that in future when we want to discuss problems of unemployment we shall have the right Ministers on that Bench.
I hope I have not taken up too much of the time of the Committee. I would like


once again to congratulate my right hon. Friend on his full statement with regard to the working of his Department. I can assure him that in the difficult times we are now facing some of us might, from time to time, indulge in a certain amount of violent criticism, as I have done of certain things, but our sole object is to help and not to hinder. If we are violent it is only our emotions which make us violent when we see hesitation and lack of drive. We wish the right hon. Gentleman all good luck in his task; and if there is anything we can do to help him we are always at his disposal.

4.50 p.m.

Mr. James Griffiths: We are living in a strange world and a strange House of Commons, and one of the strangest of all things is that the hon. Member for South Croydon (Sir H. Williams) should speak from this Box and that I should follow him. We have listened to him, as we usually do, with some pleasure, because he puts vigour into his speeches, whether they are from this Box or the benches opposite. I was very glad to find a new voice at this Box saying something that we have said for months past, without very much support from the hon. Member. Indeed, it was a joy to me to hear the hon. Member describe, as we used to describe, those magic figures which we used to get from the late Minister of Labour, but I also detected in his speech some touches of the old Victorian individualist spirit. I agree with him entirely in his plea that at a time like this quick decision and a grip on the job are essential. I believe that one of the things which has brought new confidence to the country in the last week or two is the clear evidence that the new Government are showing the grip which the old Government lacked so much. I take especial pride in this, because Members of my own party have contributed materially to that drive which has given that confidence to the country.
I pay tribute to the President of the Board of Trade for his plain, straight-forward and lucid statement, but we should do well to remember that we are discussing all these problems in a new setting. First of all, the setting of war, a war that sometimes bewilders us by the way territories change hands and areas which have been open become closed. The President of the Board of Trade was

right, I think, in stressing the fact that export trade is not static but is apt to suffer interference. However, I think the main point is this: The country is beginning to realise fully that we are engaged in a conflict for our lives. Everyone wants to see the conflict waged until we win; defeat for all would be calamitous and to none more than to the members of the movement which we represent here. Wherever Nazism goes we are its first casualties. What we are fighting is not merely the German Army, Air Force or Navy; we are fighting a German nation which is completely converted into an armed camp. Every bit of German resources and every bit of the resources of every country they conquer is immediately made part of the war machine. Every man, every industry, all wealth and every aspect of life are directed towards their war effort. My view is that we cannot overcome such an enemy by mid-Victorian capitalism in this country. We can overcome it only if we mobilise the whole resources of this country into one great national effort. In that effort the export trade plays its part.
Germany has been in many spheres a most formidable enemy and competitor. She has organised everywhere with the ruthlessness that the world fully appreciates. The export trade of Germany is fitted into her four-year plan; it is a part of her general effort and general scheme and is handled and organised by the State. Behind it are put the whole resources of that vast Empire. Our export trade in the days, weeks and months ahead of us will not survive if it is left to fight its own battles. It, too, must have behind it the whole resources of this nation. When we had a Debate towards the end of last year on this problem my hon. Friend the Member for Seaham (Mr. Shinwell) urged, as I urge now, that the problem of export trade cannot be considered as a problem of its own, unrelated to other problems. It is connected with all the activities of which the right hon. Gentleman spoke this afternoon. My hon. Friend pleaded then, as we plead now, that it is essential for us to develop the closest possible co-ordination of the whole of our economic effort and in the building-up of our general economic strategy. The whole of these problems must be considered in that light. When a White Paper was issued setting out the aims and policy of the export groups and


the structure of the machinery, we welcomed it at the time, and we are glad this afternoon to learn that since the date when that policy was announced 140 export groups have been formed in the various industries in this country and that the right hon. Gentleman has satisfied himself that they are working successfully.
But the point that I would like to make is this: Is the central machinery working? What is the power that the Central Committee have over these various groups? Is their task simply that of receiving information of the needs of these groups for raw materials and so on; are they merely acting as a clearing-house for demands made by the various groups, or will they go further and develop some kind of general policy? Are they directing the groups and putting drive into them? Unless the Central Committee are given power to direct and control and make decisions in this quickly-changing world, they will not perform the task which they might for the nation, and I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary, when he comes to reply, to tell us what powers the Central Committee have of a general directive co-ordinated character. Indeed, the President has told us that it is essential that we should not only maintain but expand as widely as possible our export trade.
Our export trade in these days has to be considered from three aspects, one of which the right hon. Gentleman stressed, and which, I think, has been very aptly described as a bread-and-butter aspect. It is essential for us to maintain and expand our export trade in order to be able to maintain the economic structure of the country. The central fact about the economic structure of this country is that it is so dependent on foreign goods. We cannot live on ourselves, we cannot sustain our own people; we must export or die. Therefore, our export trade is an essential part of the effort to keep this nation going while engaged in the struggle. It is desirable, in my opinion, that the needs of the export trade should be given a very high place in the scale of priorities. I know that the needs of the Services must come first and that everybody must be sacrificed in order that they, at any rate, shall be given the maximum amount of support in material that this country is capable of mobilising quickly.

We all realise that the needs of the Services must come first and that the export trade and every other trade must play a secondary part. But with that reservation I maintain that the export trade must come high up in the list.
Unless we expand our export trade we are sure in the end to be defeated. I believe that we shall withstand and overcome this first rush of Hitler's, and when we have done that and the turn of the tide comes, then it is that our great resources, if properly mobilised, will come into play. Therefore, I urge the President of the Board of Trade to be planning and organising, as I am sure he will, to see that our export trade gets a high place in the priorities list after the needs of the Services have been met.
Let me proceed to the next point. The export trade has now its part to play in another Department which I am sure is closely linked up with the Board of Trade, and that is in the Department of Economic Welfare.

ROYAL ASSENT.

Whereupon the Gentleman Usher of the BLACK ROD being come with a Message, the CHAIRMAN left the Chair.

MR. SPEAKER: MR. SPEAKER resumed the Chair.

Message to attend the Lords Commissioners.

The House went; and having returned—

MR. SPEAKER: MR. SPEAKER reported the Royal Assent to:

National Loans (No. 2) Act, 1940.

SUPPLY.

Again considered in Committee.

Question again proposed:
That a sum, not exceeding £297,034, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1941, for the salaries and expenses of the office of the Committee of Privy Council for Trade and subordinate departments.

5.15 p.m.

Mr. J. Griffiths: I was making a passing reference to the part which exports must play in economic warfare. I am glad to see the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Economic Warfare present, and I take this opportunity of


offering him my congratulations on his appointment. In the matter of economic warfare, I believe there is considerable concern as to whether our export trade is organised on lines which make it capable of meeting German competition. The object of the export trade in this case is to get into markets which Germany now holds or in which Germany is competing with us. If we are to compete with Germany, considering the organisation which Germany has, it is essential that we should have an efficient organisation, and that we should have somebody who is able to go to these markets and clinch the bargain there and then. Consequently, I hope there is a very close relationship between the Department of Economic Warfare, the Board of Trade and the Export Council in dealing with this matter.
The right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade, in speaking in some detail on the possibilities of expanding the export trade, referred to the fact that some of the industries which in the past have helped so materially and considerably in maintaining and developing our export trade cannot now play the part which they used to play because the goods which they produce are required to meet the needs of the country at the present time. The right hon. Gentleman referred particularly to the general metal group. It is interesting to note that in 1938 no less than 38 per cent. of our total exports were from the general metal and engineering industries of the country. At the present time, those industries are very heavily engaged in producing goods for the Services, and consequently, they cannot now play their normal part in the export trade. The second largest exporting industry, about which I do not propose to say anything, although I think some of my hon. Friends may speak about it, is the cotton industry, which in 1938 represented no less than 24 per cent. of the total export trade. I was glad to hear that there has been a considerable expansion in the cotton export trade, and I hope that industry will be able to play its part in this very important and serious time.
The third industry which has played a very important part in the export trade is one to which I want to devote my remaining remarks; it is the coal export trade. I am glad to see present the Secretary

for Mines. It is my privilege to pay him the tribute which he so richly deserves on his promotion. All those who are his colleagues in the House, and particularly those who are his colleagues in the mining group, look upon his appointment as one of the best appointments made in the formation of the new Government. He brings to his task a wide and deep knowledge of mining problems, and he has the strength of character that is required to do such a job as he is undertaking at this time. We wish him every possible success. I assure him, on behalf of my colleagues, particularly my mining colleagues and my colleagues from Wales, that we wish him all success in his great task. The industry which he is now seeking to organise has a very important part to play.
The President of the Board of Trade gave us some figures of the export trade. The figures that we get officially relate to the value of exports and not to the quantity of exports, and therefore, we are somewhat handicapped in dealing with the matter. I appreciate the reasons for not giving the figures of quantity, although I echo the hope expressed by the hon. Member for South Croydon that the time will come soon when the President of the Board of Trade may be able to give us more information than is given at present. We are at some disadvantage in trying to estimate the part which the coal export trade is now playing, since the only figures we have are those of the value. In the first four months of 1940, the value of coal exports, as indicated by the Board of Trade statistical summary, was £12,250,000, which is just over £1,000,000 more than in the first four months of 1939. One might, therefore, assume that there has been an increase in the export trade in coal during the first four months of this year, compared with the first four months of last year, but all these figures of the value of exports have to be related to changes in the price level. Consequently, my estimate is that this increase of £1,000,000 in the value of coal exports during the first four months of this year indicates not an increase in coal exports, but probably a reduction, if account be taken of the increased price level. In the first four months of 1940, instead of playing an increasing part in the great task which the country has in increasing the export


trade, the coal industry has probably played a smaller part.
The Secretary for Mines has only just started on his job, and in these days we seek to avoid wasteful controversy, but I want to make this remark. Eight months have passed since the beginning of the war and in many spheres of Government those eight months have been very woefully wasted. I feel that all my friends from the mining industry will agree with me when I say that they have been woefully wasted in the mining industry. In the early days of the war, the then Secretary for Mines met hon. Members for mining constituencies and told them of the plans which the Department had prepared and of which the War Cabinet had approved. He said that the Government required that the production of coal should be increased by 30,000,000 tons a year above the level of previous years, meaning that it was to be raised from 240,000,000 tons to 270,000,000. He said that he wanted the full co-operation of the industry in the task of reaching that increased output. I can say that he received from all parts of the industry the fullest possible co-operation, but the fact of the matter is that little or nothing was done during that period to carry out such a programme. It is only during the last month or two, and particularly during the last week or two, that a real beginning has been made in facing the problem. In view of the considerations put forward by the President of the Board of Trade and the fact that a number of commodities which we have exported in the past are now being diverted to home production, it is obvious that if we are to increase exports it is essential that we should increase coal exports. Therefore, I express the hope that now this job will be really tackled. Before concluding I want to put forward one or two considerations on this matter which I know the Secretary for Mines will bear in mind.

The Chairman: I do not wish to interrupt the hon. Member unnecessarily, but I must remind the Committee that the Mines Vote is not on the Paper to-day and is not under discussion. I realise that all that the hon. Member has been saying related to exports, but I put it to the Committee that the discussion must not be

carried into details of matters coming under the Mines Vote.

Mr. A. Bevan: Further to your Ruling, Sir Dennis, may I point out that it will be extremely difficult for hon. Members who wish to speak to make a distinction between what is needed in re-organising the coal trade and the export aspect of the coal trade, because both relate to the same industry. It seems to me that it will be difficult to make any intelligent observations on the coal export trade unless we are permitted to discuss the organisation of the coal trade as a whole.

The Chairman: Perhaps the hon. Member will not find the difficulties as great as he expects.

Mr. J. Griffiths: I intended to speak solely on the problem of the export side of the mining industry. I understand that the Export Council which has been set up has supervision over the coal export trade, and that the coal industry is represented on it. I want to put to the President of the Board of Trade and the Secretary for Mines one or two considerations which I consider to be very important. If the export trade is to play its full part in the great effort of the nation, it is obvious that often, particularly in the matter of economic warfare, exports will have to be disposed of at uneconomic prices. I want to ask a question which applies particularly to the mining industry. If that is to be done, who is to carry the burden of that effort? I speak with considerable knowledge of what has taken place in past years. The export trade of this country has had to meet the organised and subsidies competition of Germany and other countries. It has had to meet that competition but of its own resources, and the consequence has been that the export areas of the country have paid a terrible price in maintaining the export trade.
The export trade in an industry such as mining is isolated in certain areas, such as South Wales, Northumberland and Durham, where the pits are close to the coast. During the last 50 or 60 years, there has been a division of areas, some concentrating on exports and some concentrating on the home market; and the export districts have carried a tremendous burden. If the export trade is to play its part and if, in doing so, it is to make a sacrifice on prices, are arrangements now


being made for that burden to be carried by the whole of the industry or the whole of the nation? I urge that the burden should not be thrown upon those men who are immediately engaged in that part of the trade concerned with exports. That is very important. For years the men engaged in the export trade have paid in unemployment, low wages and bad conditions for carrying on and maintaining our export trade. We realise the price we have paid in coming to the rescue of the export trade when it was fighting for its life. We now have to make extra efforts to maintain and expand that export trade which is so essential to the success of the nation's effort.
A further point which I want to make, particularly in regard to the coal export trade, is that wherever we gain new markets every effort should be made to consolidate the gain. I hope that, as far as possible, we shall strain every nerve to avoid the sort of expansion of the export trade which will be a boomerang at the end of the war. We have had that before in the coal industry and in other trades. In the last war senseless things were done. Prices were raised to senseless levels, and in some markets the price was 15 guineas a ton. We paid for that in the end, and in the last analysis the men paid terribly for it.
I hope that this great drive to win new export markets will be more efficiently organised than the effort which was made in the last war, that it will be centrally controlled and directed, and that full consideration will be given, as regards prices and terms of agreement, whether in the form of barter or in any other form, to the necessity of consolidating every position that we gain. I hope that we shall not allow the export districts to suffer again, as they suffered at the end of the last war. Exports can play a great part in economic warfare, but we must at all times have in mind the necessity for consolidating our gains. I also ask that the men who are engaged in the export industries should be given a square deal now. Is it not possible for the War Cabinet to say to these men, "If you put your backs into this job now, if you do your best to help in the expansion of the export trade, we will give you an undertaking that at the end of the war you will not be allowed to suffer the things which you suffered at the end of the last

War? If that undertaking were given, I am sure that the men engaged in those industries would be ready to play their full part in helping this great national drive.

5.33 p.m.

Mr. Higgs: I also wish to congratulate the Minister on the very excellent speech which he made in opening this Debate. The subsidisation of export goods by other countries has gone, but we have still competition to meet. We have still the United States, Italy and Japan competing against us, and our greatest difficulty with regard to export at the present moment is the fixing of prices on large contracts. It is impossible under normal conditions to execute these contracts under from three to six months. To-day, owing to the demand on the industries concerned—and unfortunately the export industries clash with the munitions industry—it may be one or two years before we can execute the orders, and it is impossible to quote fixed prices. To set against that, there is the deterioration of the exchange, but, unfortunately, our exchange has not deteriorated as greatly in relation to the countries to which we export as in relation to those countries from which we import.
The Government, undoubtedly, must help those who are willing to help themselves, but I find, generally, that exporters are not normal unless they complain about the Government. Within the last 12 months, the Federation of British Industries, an organisation of which I happen to be a member, and for which I have a very great respect, issued a pamphlet on the difficulties of the export trade. It was a pamphlet of from four to six pages, and there was not one suggestion in it of what the exporter could do to increase exports. It was a criticism of the Government all the way through. It is up to the exporter to do his share, when the Government do their share. The export problem is definitely divided into two sections, namely, that in which the Government can assist and that which the industry itself can do. Payment is often the deciding factor as to whether an exporter will or will not take on a particular contract. One of the Government's functions is to assist the exporter to get his money. We have the Export Credit facilities arrangement, and I consider that


that department of the Government's activities is not sufficiently well known. The Export Credits Department is responsible for only 10 per cent. or 15 per cent. of our exports. I feel convinced that if the Department of Overseas Trade made this branch of its work and these facilities better known, more exports would be achieved. Six months ago the Department of Overseas Trade sent round a letter. They were very surprised to find that certain firms did not know of the existence of a Department of Overseas Trade. Therein, I suggest, the Government are at fault for not having let traders know of the existence of that Department and the facilities which it offers to exporting houses.
Tariffs, trade agreements and barter agreements are other problems with which the Government have to deal. The war has, undoubtedly, cemented more firmly together the Commonwealth of Nations. Cannot we take advantage of this fact at this time, in order to get some reduction of tariffs as between the various nations which form the Commonwealth? Some time ago it was suggested that an effort should be made to institute free trade between this country and New Zealand. Nothing came of the suggestion. Probably it went rather too far, but surely it would be possible to do something at present with regard to tariff barriers which would considerably facilitate overseas trade. We have the greatest bartering power in the world for our overseas trade. Before the war, the United Kingdom took all the world export of eggs and cheese. It took nearly all the mutton, bacon, ham and pork exports, and three-quarters of the world export of beef. When one firm is doing business with another, one of the most important factors to be taken into consideration is that of contra-business, and if we have contra-business with those other nations, we are in a position to make better arrangements for our exports than those nations which are not doing such business. The reply may be made that a number of those opportunities have now gone, where various nations have been conquered by Germany. On the other hand, there is a lot of trade left, and it is to a great extent our own fault if we are not getting it.
I have had the experience of interviewing our various trade commissioners

throughout the world. I agree that they are very efficient, but they are not, I think, as efficient as those of other countries. I have always thought when I have visited foreign countries that the United States and Germany—particularly Germany—had greater Government organisations overseas than we had. They are able to provide information, and they seem to be more efficient. I think we should improve our administration very considerably in this respect. Our overseas trade seems to be carried on by men who emigrated from this country 30 years ago. They are the people who are now selling goods on our behalf, whereas the competing nations are sending out men to these countries now, and that is what we have to do too. Above all, we should encourage employers themselves to go out to these countries. It is the man who carries the bag who actually sells the goods. All the shouting in this country and the forming of groups and so forth may be very good, but that will not sell the goods. It is the man on the spot in the oversea country who does the actual business.
Another suggestion that I make is that we should, when conditions permit, encourage the education of foreign students in this country. The United States, Italy, Germany, Japan have all been doing this intensively for the last few years, but we have fallen back in this respect. We failed to take advantage of the opportunities when they existed. I have had a report from the British Chamber of Commerce in Brazil which shows that in that country during the years from 1932 to 1938, Germany increased her trade 5½ times; Japan increased her trade seven times; the United States increased her trade 60 per cent., and Great Britain increased her trade 7 per cent. The point is that we are not supplying the goods which that country wants, and very often our prices are not right and we have not the right selling organisation. We want to impress people in those countries, but the mere fact of getting those people interested will not sell the goods, unless we send the right people over there to interview them. The problem is exactly the same as that of selling at home. Personal contact is necessary. The merchant has played a very important part in developing our overseas trade, but the problem to-day is not one of selling shoes and socks and electric


lamps and so forth. The problem is one of selling shoe-making machinery, knitting machinery, lamp-making machinery and so forth. That is the sort of thing we have to sell—the machinery to make the commodity, rather than the commodity itself.

Mr. Tomlinson: That is what was said in Lancashire 25 years ago.

Mr. Higgs: Unfortunately, we are not at the present moment manufacturing those particular machines as efficiently as other nations. In 1938, there was a decline in our overseas trade, but there was an increase in the case of two industries—the vehicles industry and the electricity industry. If those two industries can compete, then other industries can compete equally well, if we have the will to do so. Self-help is the thing that is necessary, and if we look for trouble we are bound to find it. The export trade will not be built up and maintained by talking at home. When people talk of exporting to foreign countries and to the Dominions, it should be remembered that there is no earthly good, for instance, in appointing an agent in Toronto to work also in Montreal. On the map, the two cities may appear comparatively close, but they are totally different. That shows the necessity for some person going out to the country and becoming conversant with the conditions there before agents are appointed. We have also the case of Montevideo and Buenos Aires. Those two cities are 120 miles apart, yet it is usual with firms to appoint an agent in Buenos Aires to work also in Montevideo. They are entirely different cities in different nations. Those methods will never work. That kind of thing must be taken into account before we can develop our overseas trade in the manner which is so necessary.
Selling goods overseas often costs less than selling goods at home. We have to remember that at the present moment, with taxation as high as it is, travelling expenses are a charge upon industry. Here is an excellent opportunity of which firms who are anxious to develop their overseas trade can take advantage, by allowing the Government to foot the bill. It is, however, essential to supply the goods which the importing country wants. I came across a case about 12 months ago—it was before the war—which showed that the Germans were then

exporting egg-cups to India. They had got the trade, and the only reason why they got the trade was because they had found that the Indian egg is slightly smaller than the ordinary egg in these countries. They then made a cup of smaller size for that particular trade. A little thing like that may often be a deciding factor. Whatever speeches may be made here, unless we actually do the job we shall not develop export trade as other nations are doing. Germany is adapting her products to suit the various markets of the world, and we must do the same. This country exports hardly any road-making machinery, agricultural machinery, air-conditioning plant, optical measuring instruments, dental equipment, wireless sets or articles of that kind. The difficulty with the manufacturer at the present moment is that of delivery. The Air Ministry comes along and worries him to deliver; the Ministry of Supply worries him to deliver. Then he gets his export order, and no one worries him about it, with the natural result that the export order falls into the background. To-day the export of certain commodities is easier than it has been for a considerable time, because of the shortage of German supplies which are now cut off from the markets of the world. It is the Government's job to help manufacturers and to give them permission and assistance to export certain percentages of their products. They must help the small firms and encourage and inspire the larger firms. My concluding remark is that, whatever practical assistance the Government can give, it is the manufacturer himself, if he has the will and the desire, who can do far more to help our export trade.

5.46 p.m.

Mr. Richards: I should like to pay my tribute to the President of the Board of Trade for the very clear way in which he made his statement to the House. I was very glad that, amongst other things, he visualised the importance of foreign trade in relation to the life of this nation. We must all remember that. Foreign trade is of essential importance for the existence of this nation and is a permanent factor in its life. What we must do is to improve the position as far as we can. I cannot help feeling that there is a great deal of apathy in this country on this question because we are wedded to the idea of the in-


evitability of victory. We all believe that victory is inevitable because of our considerable superiority over our enemy in the economic field, but victory in this field, as in other fields, will not come without a great deal of organisation. Our economic resources must be mobilised and deployed in the same way as are our military resources.
It is rather interesting to contrast our attitude towards this question with that of our enemy. We have heard from my hon. Friend the Member for Llanelly (Mr. J. Griffiths) the formidable character of our enemy, both in the economic, and in the military field. Our enemy has a different economic philosophy which has now become well known—it is the philosophy of economic self-sufficiency, or autarchy, as the name is sometimes used. The Germans argue that it should be the ideal of every nation to be self-sufficient, and the quarrel they have with us is that we have restricted their activities to the extent that they do not feel they are self-sufficient. Their claim is for elbow room by which they hope to attain economic self-sufficiency. I will not enter into the question of how much elbow room will satisfy Germany, although, as I have said, that is clearly their object in the economic field. No great nation, their leader has said, is either free, independent or sovereign so long as it is dependent on the foreigner from the economic standpoint. That means they must have recourse to goods indispensable to their life. Our attitude is very different from that of the Germans. We have always relied upon inter-dependence—I do not think anybody has ever preached the doctrine of complete economic independence so far as this country is concerned. We have always believed in economic inter-dependence, and, as a result, we have been able to use our resources, as a great industrial nation, to the fullest extent and become one of the wealthiest nations in the world.
I am glad that the President of the Board of Trade is well aware of the traditional approach to this very important question. We want to encourage our dependence upon other people so that we can encourage their dependence for trade purposes upon ourselves. Only an industrial nation, I think, can become a wealthy nation, and that we should keep clearly in mind. We have been able to exploit

our own resources, and, incidentally, in doing so we have exploited the resources of other nations. The only way we have done that is by our trade. That is very interesting in view of what has been said about making this country self-sufficient in food. We all agree that that is impossible. Despite the admirable attempt which has been made to increase our food production, no one has ever suggested that we could be self-sufficient. For example, together with Ireland we produced 10,000,000 quarters of wheat in 1938, whereas we needed 28,000,000 quarters, which is about three times as many quarters as we can grow in this country. The position in France is very different. We are able to import food cheaply, not because the returns per acre in other countries, Canada, or the Argentine, are as good as in this country—in Canada, for example, 13 bushels per acre are produced as against 37 in this country—but because they can produce wheat at a cheaper cost. We are very wise in importing as much food as we can from these countries. It must also be remembered that they are very anxious to import our own commodities and, therefore, from the economic point of view, we should be in a very strong position. It is better to import commodities which can be produced more cheaply in other countries than to try to produce them ourselves.
Another point is that we have no alternative at the present time. We are in a worse position than in 1914–18, when we had a considerable amount of American securities. We had about £3,000,000,000 or £4,000,000,000 at that time, but a great many of our securities were disposed of in paying for the raw material we required in those fateful years. We were left with about £1,000,000,000. Another point to be remembered is that before 1914 we exported a great deal of capital. It is estimated that we exported something like £180,000,000 a year compared with a figure of about £30,000,000 at the present time. Consequently we have no means of paying for those things we require, and we are driven to the only alternative which remains, and that is to export. Exports are vital to the life of this nation because we can no longer obtain credits in the United States. By the Neutrality Act America has now a cash and carry basis upon which it does its business. To import those things so


necessary for victory we must, to an increasing extent, rely upon our exports.
The question which arises is, where are we to export? That question should be analysed from the standpoint of the future as well as from the standpoint of the present. We have driven the Germans off the sea, and the corollary should be to drive them out of the markets of the world. Obviously, they cannot export because they have not the means of communicating between their country and the world, and we should make a dead set upon Germany's trade with a view to securing it, not only for the present, but for the future. If we analyse German trade we find that out of a total export of £262,000,000, three-fifths went to the neighbouring countries of Germany. We cannot very easily get at those countries at the present time; but some £105,000,000 was exported to various countries outside the immediate sphere and influence of Germany. To the Mediterranean she exported £20,000,000; £17,000,000 to this country; £7,000,000 to the United States; £29,000,000 to Central America and £12,000,000 to Asia.
That seems to me to point to an interesting opportunity for British trade to expand. I do not know that we can do very much at present in the Mediterranean, but we ought to be able to do a great deal among the South American Republics, which formerly took a total of £29,000,000 from Germany. These South American countries are finding themselves for a second time in a quandary on account of a European war. German traders were gradually and effectively pushing their way into their markets before the late war. Then the war broke the economic connection between them and Germany, with the result that other competitors got in, particularly America. At the outbreak of the present war Germany was gradually regaining its trade, and for a second time the economic connection between the South American countries and Germany has been broken. I believe that they are finding themselves in a very sorry position. For example, the Argentine had made a barter agreement with Germany before the war to be supplied with railway engines and to supply meat in return. Now the engines are not available, and the Argentine has the meat on its

hands. In another case there was an arrangement for electrical machinery on a considerable scale to be delivered in exchange for meat and wool. Now the machinery has not been delivered, and for the second time within a quarter of a century the South American republics find themselves in considerable difficulty because they want these things in order to develop their country.
It is a splendid opportunity for British merchants to step in and take the trade from the Germans. Our keenest rivals will, of course, be the Americans, who are next door and claim to have some economic right over these people. The exports from these countries, however, are not exactly the things that the Americans want. They do not want the meat and the wool, and they particularly do not want the coffee and other commodities. Consequently, there is a difficulty in their trading together, because America has an overflow of the commodities that the South American countries have to offer. I suggest to the President of the Board of Trade that he might, although the Board of Trade may have done it already, carefully analyse the trend of German trade before the war and see whether we cannot step in and take that trade as a permanent thing for ourselves.

6.4 p.m.

Mr. Levy: I want to deal with a constituency point, but before doing so I want to offer my tribute to the President of the Board of Trade for his speech. I remember his saying on one occasion that he felt a little nervous in facing a critical House of Commons. He was particularly nervous, I thought, one day when he addressed a Committee upstairs. When I listened to the verbal testimonials and the bouquets that have been handed to him to-day I thought he must have felt that he was in a mutual admiration society rather than in the House of Commons. I am sure, however, that they were all very well deserved.

Mr. Bevan: The right hon. Gentleman has not expressed his admiration for us at all.

Mr. Levy: Not up to the moment. While we are congratulating one another, may I say that the hon. Member for South Croydon (Sir H. Williams) made a very lucid, forceful and interesting speech? When my right hon. Friend was addressing the Committee upstairs on the export


trade, I called his attention to an interesting point which concerns my constituency. They are large exporters of textiles, and I think it would be true to say that having regard to the Excess Profits Tax and so on, the Government are 75 per cent. sleeping financial partners—sleeping, that is, in so far as they are not active except in dealing with finance. The merchants or manufacturers in this trade have to go out and find their own custom and obtain their own orders. I have yet to hear that the Government have obtained any orders for the export trade which they have passed on to any of the manufacturers in my constituency.
One firm to which I called my right hon. Friend's attention is a large export manufacturing concern which deals mostly with the Middle East. There for many months, owing to exchange difficulties, the procedure with regard to payments was by means of two sets of clearing houses, one in the Middle East and one in this country, which dealt with a barter exchange. This firm sent to the Middle East, as they have done twice a year for the last 50 or 60 years, and obtained an order in Sofia worth £60,000. A question arose about payment. By the Export Credit facilities, the firm could ensure under certain sets of conditions up to 75 per cent., or even 90 per cent. There was a difficulty, however. Having obtained the order, the manufacturer goes home and has to enter into commitments for the raw material with which to carry out the order, and he has to pay wages during the manufacture. If he does not ship the order because of any international difficulty, the goods, which are of a specialised character, become a total loss on his hands, because there is no other market for them. If he ships them, he has to insure up to 75 per cent., subject to getting payment on the barter basis the other side. If he manufactures the goods at a profit, and is able to ship them and to get payment, he will get only 25 per cent. of the profits, because the Government are a sleeping partner to the tune of 75 per cent. Why should the manufacturer face a 100 per cent. risk for a 25 per cent. profit while the Government take no risk for a 75 per cent. profit?
The hon. Member for South Croydon talked of delay. I have been in touch

with the Board of Trade about this problem for months, and it was not until my right hon. Friend came to his present position and his attention was called to it that action seems to have been taken. As I understood him, an insurance arrangement has now been come to and will be brought into operation to-morrow. I would like to know how it will operate. If a manufacturer takes an order, is he to be supplied with any money to enable him to meet his commitments in the purchase of raw material, or will he not get any money advanced until shipment? I feel sure that, if my right hon. Friend will explain the procedure as lucidly as he is able to do and the exporting industries thoroughly understand it, it will be a stimulus to the export trade. The firm to which I referred came back with a full order book from Turkey, but, owing to the international situation and the fact that they could not afford to enter into commitments for raw material, they were unable to complete the orders. The export textile trade in my constituency is practically stopped—and properly stopped, because no managing director or chairman of a company can afford to pay such a risk with his shareholders' money. I ask the Parliamentary Secretary, in winding up, to be as clear and concise as possible—and nobody can be clearer or more concise—so that the general public will be fully aware of the Export Credit facilities and so that manufacturers can go out and take orders from different parts of the world as we desire them to do.

6.13 p.m.

Mr. A. Bevan: The House in these days is usually very empty and extraordinarily listless. Our reason, of course, is that our anxieties are elsewhere. There is another reason to which the Committee will have to pay some attention. We are speaking under great limitations and restraint and are unable to be as frank as is necessary in these grave times. If our discussions are to be intelligent, and if we are to give to the nation the services of which hon. Members are capable, we shall have to ask for private Sessions much more frequently in order that we may be able to talk more frankly. There are many things that lots of us want to say, and we cannot say them. It is no use our saying them to Ministers, because they very often relate to general


policy. I do not want to trail my coat before the Chair, but I should like to point out that in these days we are rather more exempt from the limitations of debate than formerly. The General Powers Act has conferred upon the Government powers so wide that I submit, with all respect, that the Chair is estopped from saying that we cannot discuss certain matters. Hon. Members who have been worried about Supply days need not be worried at all, because they can be days of general discussion.
The point that I am making is that it is impossible for us to have discussions such as we ought to have, surveying the whole range of industry, unless we can do so with comparative freedom. The Government have been in office for two weeks and like my hon. Friend the Member for Llanelly (Mr. J. Griffiths) I felicitate them upon the way in which they have set about their task. The personnel has been improved enormously. But the main case we had against the other Government was not merely that they were a poor lot themselves, but that they were adopting a very poor policy. I would rather have a bad man with a good policy than a good man with a bad policy. Many of my hon. Friends have crossed the Floor, but that is no good to us unless their principles have crossed with them. We do not want the principles of those on the opposite side to cross over to here.

Sir Patrick Hannon: I thought we were discussing the policy of the Board of Trade and not principles crossing the Floor of the House.

Mr. Bevan: The hon. Member has always discussed trade without any principles at all. I am anxious to introduce a few principles into the discussion.

The Temporary Chairman (Mr. Charles Williams): I think we had better discuss export trade rather than principles.

Mr. Bevan: If it were possible to discuss export trade without any principles at all, I should be delighted to hear the speech. It is necessary for us to discuss upon what principles the export trade is to be organised, because otherwise we shall be talking more foolishness than usual. We ought to ask the President of the Board of Trade and my hon. Friend the Secretary for Mines how they

envisage their tasks, because the case against the Government for the last eight months has been not merely that they themselves have been deficient in personal qualifications for the job but have set about it in the wrong way.
It is no use our deceiving ourselves: the position of the enemy has enormously improved. It is impossible for Germany to occupy Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, Belgium, Holland, Norway and Denmark without bringing under the control of the Nazis a much greater economic organisation than they had before. In many respects the Germans have been considerably advantaged by their recent conquests, and we may as well admit it. Germany has been financing herself and supplying herself, like an old medieval army, by loot, to a very large extent, and when she comes to stabilise and consolidate her conquests—I hope only temporary—she will have at her disposal raw materials which she did not have before and be able to withhold from us raw materials to which we formerly had access. We shall need to put forth immense exertion and energy if we are to win, as win we shall, but we shall not win if we do not put forth that energy. It is no use, when talking about the disasters which have befallen, to say that we had disasters in the last war and yet we won, as though disasters provide the blue prints of victory. Disaster was never a recipe for victory.
I do not think there is any lack of machinery at the disposal of the President of the Board of Trade. He has so many boards and committees, consultative and otherwise, that they are like a barbed-wire entanglement about the Department, as they are about all the other Government Departments. They remind me of the old Western town in America. When you went down the main street it looked most impressive, but most of the buildings had false fronts, and if you looked behind them, there was nothing there. A great deal of what the Government have been doing in the last eight or nine months has been simply building up an impressive facade, empty gesticulation, with no principle of action involved.
One of the defects under which we suffer in comparison with our opponents is that the House of Commons is discussing trade and economic organisation


when they are not the responsibility of this House but are the personal private responsibility of hon. Members who sit opposite. A great many of the homilies which we hear on these occasions should be directed not to hon. Members here, who have no power here to deal with these matters, but to hon. Members who are in charge of businesses. I suggest that if we are to win the war, we shall have to adopt unorthodox, experimental and imaginative methods. It is no use boggling over the swallowing of our prejudices and principles, because we shall have to do it. Consider the organisation of the coal export trade. I shall speak with great frankness, because I think it is our duty to do so, provided we can do it without giving away information. My hon. Friend the Secretary for Mines is engaged in a great production drive, because we cannot increase coal exports unless we can provide sufficient coal for home needs and export as well. We had experience of that in the last war. So far the Government have not the economic control which they had in the last war—nothing like it. They have general powers, but if those general powers are to be used only for control, and not as instruments of direct action, very often they will fail. The Government will find themselves involved in a morass of conscious or, more often still, unconscious sabotage by the interests that should be marshalled into line.
That is true of no industry more than of the coal industry. In the last war, although the mining industry was under strict Government control, mineowners in many cases deliberately sabotaged the production of coal by leaving good seams undeveloped and exploiting less productive seams, and there is no guarantee that they will not do it again. The personnel of the coal industry owes its first allegiance to the coal industry. If we have only control of the industry, then when the war is over the industry will go back to the coal owners. The managerial and administrative staffs will pay much more attention to the point of view of the coal owner who can dismiss them than to the point of view of the State, which is far away. We shall have in industries which are brought under control a divided allegiance, and divided allegiance is never good anywhere.
How are we to do this job properly? The only way to get this basic industry properly organised, first from the point of view of the production of coal, and then from the point of view of its distribution and export, is to bring the mining industry at once not merely under State control but under State ownership. I am not advancing that view because it is part of the political creed with which we on this side are associated, but because we shall not get the maximum effort out of this nation unless we adopt methods of that kind, that is to say, unless we have direct action and not indirect action such as is involved in the work of these innumerable boards and consultative committees. As my hon. Friend the Member for Llanelly has pointed out, the organisation of the export of coal is fraught with almost insurmountable difficulties. So long as the burden of maintaining the export of coal falls unequally upon different parts of the country, and unequally upon different coalowners in the same part of the country, we are creating unnecessary difficulties in organising it.
Why not cut through the jungle by bold action? The Government have the power, and I am certain that the people outside, who have lost a great many of their prejudices in the last few months and will lose many more in the months to come, will not tolerate seeing the utilisation of our coal resources handicapped through the failure of the Government to use the power which has been given to them. The Government are using their power against labour, and we expect it to be used against property, but we shall not expect it to be used against property merely because it is desirable to nationalise property. They should consider the matter empirically. They should bring under State ownership at once those basic industries which produce a simple, standardised product and can be easily organised, and discuss the compensation to be paid for them after the war is over.

Sir William Wayland: And we should get less coal.

Mr. Bevan: My hon. Friend is now speaking out of the depth of his prejudice and not of his knowledge.

Sir W. Wayland: Out of my experience.

Mr. Bevan: We do know what we are talking about. If you bring personal


acquisitiveness into conflict with State interests, you will not have carried out effectively—

Sir W. Wayland: You will never get the same energy put in by civil servants as you get from the coalowners.

Mr. Bevan: Is that the point of view which is going to dominate the policy? That is the limping, halting, muddled view which has brought the country to its present pass. It is the reliance upon outworn theories of that kind which has brought us to this position, which is so bad that we dare not discuss it. Hon. Members opposite will have to answer to the people before very long for what they have done in this matter. I wish it were now. We cannot deny ourselves the right of bringing these matters to the notice of the Committee merely because our representatives are in the Government. We believe that an intelligent, scientific and economic organisation of our resources is bound up with the adoption of principles of that kind. You have, on the Government Front Bench, Liberals, Socialists, Conservatives of various shades and Independents; and, frankly, the Government must decide what their motif is to be, what melody they are going to play. It is no good bringing a hockey team, an Association football team and a cricket team together and asking them to play water polo. The Government have to decide in what direction they will go.
I submit to the Committee that the only way in which the Government can do this job effectively is by bringing under their immediate and direct authority a sort of vertebra of the country, around which we can subsequently clothe the living flesh of dynamic action; but you will not be able to do that if you use the antiquated methods of the last war. I sometimes think—although one does not like to say these things—that it is almost a pity that we won that war because to-day we have almost an imitation of what happened in the last war. Our enemy has imitated nothing of what happened in the last war because he lost it, and one of the advantages he has is that he is bringing to all his problems a modern mind and is adopting modern methods, combined with imaginative drive. I do not know what the rest of my hon. Friends are thinking, but I believe that increasing pressure will be brought to bear upon the Government by us, and by overriding necessity, that

they shall use the powers they have to bring about an effective economic organisation.
I should like to say one thing more before I sit down. Not only in the production but in the sale and distribution of coal something will have to be done. We cannot face another winter with the monstrous price exactions that are now going on, such as 80s. a ton. It is an outrage on our great cities and is wastage of labour. Our people are being bled by parasites who are peddling coal everywhere. The time has come to use the powers with which this House has endowed the Government, not only in order that they might have a club in their hand when discussing matters with business men, but in order to be able to bring the club down on the heads of those who have proved their incapacity in the past to organise these things, with the aim of letting the State handle them direct. The Government can thus prove to the country that they are prepared to let nothing stand in the way of pursuing the common aim, and of bringing fresh heart to our people.

6.34 p.m.

Sir Stanley Reed: I rise to put only one point before the President of the Board of Trade. I have ventured to put it before, and I would not repeat it now but for the fact that on the earlier occasion we did not have the advantage of his presence among us. I think I am the only man in this House who represents that person of paramount importance, the overseas buyer. Nearly all Members of this House are linked with production or with selling, but I spent a good part of my life as an overseas buyer of goods costing many hundreds of thousands of pounds, including electrical, transportation and hydraulic machinery. When the overseas buyer has to decide where he shall place his order, what is the dominating factor? It is price. Members of this Committee will make a fatal mistake if they think that the great engineering and other trades of this country have a monopoly of quality. We have very severe and efficient competitors in those trades. Sentiment may come in to a certain extent, but, after all, we like to put our orders in the places from which we came and with those with whom we have been associated in the businesses with which we grew up.


After all is said and done, the determining factor, except in a very limited field, will always be price, and I would in all earnestness ask hon. Gentlemen opposite who have so much at stake in this matter to consider the influence of their proposal on the prices of the articles which they and we have to sell against very fierce competition throughout many other parts of the world.
My hon. Friend the Member for South Croydon (Sir H. Williams) very briefly touched on a matter in what I may call a fresh-air speech, and I venture to reinforce it in passing. The point is, what is to be the influence of Government action in enormous purchases of munitions upon the prices of the manufactured products of our export trade, which we have to sell in the open market against competitors such as I have been up against in my own trade? We have to consider also the effect of the 100 per cent. Excess Profits Tax on those prices. In theory, not a Member of this Committee does not welcome the 100 per cent. Excess Profits Tax, but it can be the most disastrous and expensive procedure in the history of industry and economics unless it is carefully watched. That necessary but costly business of the production of munitions may have a reflex action upon the other branches of industry which have to go out into competitive export markets. I would ask the President of the Board of Trade to keep those considerations before his mind, amid his many other important preoccupations in the policy which he pursues in the general direction of our industry and trade.

6.38 p.m.

Sir Patrick Hannon: I apologise to the Committee for the condition of my voice, but I would not like this Debate to conclude without taking the opportunity to pay a tribute to the wonderful work which the President of the Board of Trade has done since he undertook his present office. The organisation of the Export Council, and the way in which he has carried out the organisation of the various groups, constitutes a new economic outlook in the life of this nation. Having something to do with the industry and export trade of this country, I would like to say that we feel, throughout the whole industrial and commercial community, that we now have at the Board of Trade somebody

with a constructive purpose devoted to the expansion of our trade, and with a more enlightened view of the possibilities and the responsibilities of that trade than—I say with the greatest respect—any of his predecessors. We live in very difficult times. The speech of the hon. Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Bevan), whose enthusiasm and fervour we all admire because of the energy he displays everywhere and which he brings from the mountains of Wales, was, I thought, a little unkind to my hon. Friend who has just taken charge of the Mines Department. We have the greatest confidence in the efficiency and the capacity of the new Secretary for Mines to deal with its problems.

Mr. Bevan: I am entitled to say that, so far from making strictures upon my hon. Friend, I most unusually paid him compliments. Moreover, if there were strictures, I fancy he would rather have my strictures than the hon. Gentleman's plaudits.

Sir P. Hannon: I leave that to the Minister himself to decide, but I thought the gist of the speech of the hon. Member was that much more energy and enthusiasm should be put into the production of coal, both for home consumption and export. I am content to leave the development of that great enterprise in the hands of the Secretary for Mines. The export trade of this country is in a very difficult position, but the figures given this afternoon by the President of the Board of Trade and the hon. Member for South Croydon (Sir H. Williams) indicate that we have maintained our position despite very great competition. However, there is a little more to be done. We are, at this moment, appropriating throughout the country raw material for articles produced for home consumption which should be still more restricted and retained, in the first place, for munitions and, secondly, for export. I am concerned with various enterprises in engineering, and I would ask the President of the Board of Trade that not one pound of steel in these embarrassing days should be devoted to any article of production for the home market if it can be employed in providing munitions of war or in making goods for the export trade. Why are we appropriating steel in these days for


the making of pots, pans and things of this kind?

Mr. Ellis Smith: And cinemas.

Sir P. Hannon: Why should raw materials be appropriated for anything except the provision of munitions of war to support our splendid Fighting Services or for the export trade? I hope that, in the exercise of the power which he now enjoys in that post, and in the fulfilment of the vision which he has brought to bear in that office, the President of the Board of Trade will keep that consideration before his mind. I spent a couple of nights last week in the works in which we make munitions of war, and I would ask the Committee to realise that midnight work does not contribute very much to healthy exposition during the afternoon in this Committee. I apologise to the Committee that I am not able to speak in the way that I should have liked to have addressed them. I am satisfied that the President of the Board of Trade enjoys the full confidence of the industrial community of this country. Every trade organisation with which I am in any way associated has the fullest regard for his broad, generous and sympathetic outlook in the development of trade. He can have with him, in the exercise of his responsibilities, and in taking advantage of the opportunities presented to him, the heartfelt sympathy and support of the whole industrial community.

6.44 p.m.

Mr. Tomlinson: I have listened this afternoon to various expositions on economics, and I think I may pride myself on knowing little or nothing about it, but it seems strange, in discussing a subject like this, with something at the back of our minds upon which we are all intent, that people should be concerned particularly about retaining the privileges which have been theirs in the past, and with seeking to safeguard interests which, in comparison with those we have in mind and are seeking to further, are as nothing. Yet time and again in the speeches which have been made this afternoon I detected a feeling that whatever must be done at this time in order to improve export trade and to win the war, we must somehow seek to retain those things upon which we rely for the privileges which we have

enjoyed in the past. That feeling was particularly noticeable in two or three instances. It may be that it is just the outcome of human nature, and it may be that it is the effect of having enjoyed privileges for so long, but when the suggestion was made, as it was made not more than a few moments ago, that you could never get from a civil servant the service which you get from the individual who is inspired by the motive of making profits, then all I have to say is that if that is the opinion of the people in this Committee and if it represents the opinion of the people in this country, it is an utter impossibility to win the war. Make no mistake about that. Unless public service is the most vital object at the moment, then not only are we wasting our time but our lads are wasting their lives. That is the thing which has to get behind the minds of business people in this country just as we are trying to get it behind the minds of the workers.
This problem, as I see it, can be described as it was expressed by my hon. Friend the Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Bevan). In reading his speech, if you put "cotton" instead of "coal" you have what I want to say, except that the circumstances are slightly different. In the main it is the way in which cotton is taken, handled and utilised which will determine whether or not you will get out of the effort that everybody seems to be wanting to make, the result which is most desired. Let us take what is happening at the present time. I was pleased to hear the President of the Board of Trade speak this afternoon. I do not need to pay him a compliment. The drive which he has put into his work is a sufficient compliment for a man who wants to do his job. I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will refuse, as he said he would, to allow these Boards and Committees to clutter up the essential work, because that is the danger as I see it.
Take what is happening with regard to cotton. I am glad that during the last six months there has been some attempt to bring some order into the cotton industry. For many years this was our greatest exporting industry. Now it has to play perhaps the most important part in this drive which is to take place, and therefore we must face the situation that, it is not enough just to appoint a Cotton Controller, give him a committee and leave him to his own devices. We must


do something more than that, for we must recognise that there are competing interests in the cotton industry, just as in the coal industry. I do not say they find it difficult to reconcile their public duty with their private needs, but at the back of the minds of the majority of business men either in this Committee or anywhere else there is the instinct of self-preservation, and they see the necessity for retaining the entity which they may have built up and which is under their name. What is the outcome? You have the public interests competing with the private interests of the individual, to the detriment of the latter in the long run, because unless public interest is served private interest will disappear in the holocaust which follows.
I may not know much about economics but I do know something about plain, sensible, honest facts. I am rather like the man who was offered a job and the committee who were offering him the job said: "We will pay you a salary of £500 a year and it will be payable quarterly." This man, who was more used to every-day methods of doing business, said, "That is no use to me." They said, "What do you want, then?" He said, "How much is it a week?" When an hon. Member said that the 100 per cent. Excess Profits Tax might be the most ruinous thing to industry it left me cold, because I do not follow that suggestion for a moment. What is it in terms of common sense?—not in terms of text-book economics, nor in terms of the City of London. The problem is this: We have to increase our export trade in order to maintain our economic life. I do not know what the figure is but let us say it is £120,000,000 a year. That means £10,000,000 a month. What are the products by which that can be obtained? Take coal and cotton. I am not interested in many things other than cotton because I have lived by it. What is the amount by which cotton must increase its output in order to give that quota of £120,000,000 which is necessary? That is the problem so far as cotton is concerned.
Apply that test to every industry and then you have the problem in so many different compartments. What is your available raw cotton, from America, Egypt and India? In order to bring

what you want in the shape of export trade what is the amount of raw cotton that is needed? Have you the shipping available? What is the percentage of shipping available to bring the cotton and what proportion of cotton is to be used for the Services, home trade and export? It is the export that matters in this Debate. Having decided what the proportions are, then it must be definitely laid down that only so many bales of cotton can be used for one purpose or for another purpose. It is not a bit of good the Cotton Controller coming along in February and saying, "There is going to be a restriction," and at the end of March saying, "We can take the restriction off. The month that has been devoted to refusing home trade has given an impetus to foreign trade, and therefore we can take off the restriction and we can allow cotton to go freely again." That is not organisation. That is the sort of thing which might happen in the back kitchen of a home where they have not been taught mathematics. That is not organisation for a people who are up against a machine like the machine created in Germany. You cannot fight a war of this description, against people who are so well organised, with an organisation so slip-shod as that. You cannot afford to waste a bale of cotton lest your calculations are thrown out of balance.
It is said that you can control it by price. You cannot control anything by price. The problem is: There are so many bales of cotton; how are they to be used? There are 700 or 800 different firms in Lancashire, all competing with the desire to use the raw cotton. From what I know of the Lancashire manufacturer, they are all wanting to do their best for the country, but they are all brought up in such a way that while they are doing their best for the country they are going to do the best for themselves, and I do not blame them for that. I know something of what they have gone through in the last 20 years. I am blaming the organisation which we have established, which is allowing them to compete in this great struggle and with this sort of problem in the export market.
What is the problem in my own little village? It is a sort of miniature of the whole of Lancashire. If you can imagine


five mills in a little village, then you have a picture of the whole county. The more you bring it down to simple proportions of that kind the better you can see the problem. The people were poor, and, like all others, they responded to the appeal to work an extra 7½ hours, from 48 to 55½ hours. They have gone back to six o'clock, after saying they would never do so. Under normal circumstances they never would because of their past experiences. That is going on in four mills out of five. In the other mill they are signing on at the employment exchange because of lack of materials. That is not organisation; that is confusion. These people come to me and say, "What is the sense in it?" There is no sense in it, and there is no order in it. The reason is that, running through the whole of the cotton industry, you have that principle which has been expounded from the other side this afternoon. We cannot win this war by that method, and we must win the war.
The Lancashire manufacturers, individualistic and keen as anybody on private enterprise though they are, would welcome the strong hand of an individual who would say, "You have so many skips of weft in the cellar in your place. You will not use it three weeks hence; it has to come out now and go into the place where it is needed." The bottle-necks which were released in the munitions department have to be released in the cotton industry and then we shall be on the way to solving the problem. The export problem needs tackling as vigorously as any other problem and it can be tackled only on that line. Private interests cannot be allowed to stand in the way of public interests, and I hope that the President of the Board of Trade will say to the Cotton Controller: "It is not enough to lay down regulations. You must enforce them to the extent of applying them to the individual."

6.57 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade (Major Lloyd George): I have taken part probably on most occasions in discussions on this Vote, but it is the first time that I have taken part in one from this side of the House. I do not think it will make much difference to me now, because I do not remember saying anything in recent years that I need worry about to-day. Most of the dis-

cussions that we used to have before this year were concentrated to a very large extent on doing what we could to try and repair the damage that had resulted from the last war, and many of us thought—indeed, many of us still think—that far more drastic steps should have been taken than were taken. Now we are at war again, and it may well be that some people would think that discussion on export trade might be a little out of place under the circumstances obtaining at the moment. I could not agree with that suggestion, because if the war had continued as it started, as a war of very little action, it might well have been that the Board of Trade would have been the most important Department of all from the point of view of the war effort.
But even now that comparative inaction has changed to what, unfortunately, can only be described as the most violent action, it still remains true that the trade of this country must play a very important part in order that we may obtain the supplies which are vital if we are to succeed in the struggle upon which we are now engaged. I hope that hon. Members will extend a good deal of indulgence to me to-day, since most of this Debate has been concerned with exports, and, unfortunately, the Secretary for Overseas Trade has not yet been able to obtain an import licence into Parliament. If it has anything to do with me, he will get it very quickly.
As has always happened on the occasion of this Vote, we have had, not only an interesting, but, I think, a most useful, discussion. Many suggestions have been made from all sides of the Committee which I can assure hon. Members will receive most careful attention. Most hon. Members, quite rightly, have been extremely complimentary to my right hon. Friend. The hon. Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Bevan) said that there had been no compliments coming from this side. I might repair that omission now, and say that all the speeches that I have heard were worthy of the greatest praise. The hon. Member for Ebbw Vale told us that he did not think much of the policy of the Government. He compared it to one of those false fronts that one sees in Western towns in America. I do not think he could substantiate such a statement in reference to the Board of Trade. He said that he would rather have a bad


man with a good policy than a good man with a bad policy; but would he not prefer a good man with a good policy?

Mr. Pritt: Your trumpeter must be dead.

Major Lloyd George: I was not referring to myself at the moment, though I may come in for a bit of praise at the tail end. I was referring to my right hon. Friend. The hon. Member for South Croydon (Sir H. Williams) raised a good many points with which I should like to deal; but, as he is not here now, perhaps I had better reply first to the hon. Member for Llanelly (Mr. J. Griffiths), who made some very interesting points, particularly with regard to coal. He pointed out that the rise in coal exports was merely a rise in value. I do not dispute that, but I ask him to remember that that took place at a most difficult period for this country. In the first place, there was a very great diversion of coal to the needs of munitions production in this country; and, in the second place, two months out of that four months which the hon. Member took were the most severe period of winter, I suppose, that this country has seen for over 50 years. In the circumstances, I do not think that the figures for the first four months of this year are anything that we need to be ashamed of. He then referred to the possibility of our having to sell our coal at uneconomic prices for export purposes; and said, if that was the case, how would the burden be borne? I do not think there is any need to discuss that question until it arises. At present, there is no lack of export markets for coal from this country, and no question of our not getting a fair price.

Mr. Bevan: Is there not a natural reluctance, on the part of those who might supply new markets, to push coal into these markets, where they have not the advantages that they had in the old markets?

Major Lloyd George: That is a question for the Ministry of Economic Warfare; but, in any case, there is no reason for this particular question to be discussed at present.

Mr. J. Griffiths: In that connection I was referring to the fact that where our coal exports are competing with those of

Germany, we might find it desirable to undercut Germany's. If we had to do that, I wanted the burden to be a national one, and not to be placed on the people actually engaged in the coal trade.

Major Lloyd George: That is a question for the Ministry of Economic Warfare.

Mr. Griffiths: Is the hon. and gallant Member going to deal with the general point which I raised, as to whether the central Export Council has general and co-ordinating powers, executive powers, over these groups, or whether it is merely a clearing house?

Major Lloyd George: It is not a clearing house; it has full executive powers.

Mr. E. Smith: Is it using them?

Major Lloyd George: Every indication goes to show that it is working very well. The hon. Member for South Croydon started off with a very interesting speculation—I am not sure whether it was an arithmetical calculation. He said that one out of every 100,000 born in this country finished up on this front bench, and that one in 5,000,000 made his maiden speech from this Box. I wish he could have told us the proportion who spoke from that Box opposite after having previously sat on this side, without any change having occurred in the composition of Parliament. It would be very difficult to calculate. The hon. Member made a very interesting speech. The limitation Order, he said, led to panic buying, but I do not think there is any evidence of panic buying as a result of that Order. I should take it as a very serious reflection on myself if there had been, because it was my broadcast which followed the issuing of the Order. The response throughout the country to the appeal which I made at that time has been very good. There was indeed a certain amount of extra buying, but I understand that the biggest amount was in respect of silk stockings, which an organ of the Press had said were to come under the Order, but which in fact were not included. Such buying did not matter much as far as the Order was concerned. The hon. Member then asked how, if he were walking down Victoria Street and saw a shirt in a shop window, he would help our export trade by not buying that shirt. I assume that, if he did not buy it, the shirt would remain in stock, and, therefore, the retailer would


not have to replace it from the wholesaler; the wholesaler would not have to replace it from the manufacturer; the shirt would remain to be purchased by another member of the public, and another shirt would be released for export.

Mr. Bevan: Do you mean to say that the hon. Member did not understand that?

Major Lloyd George: He put the proposition. He then mentioned the question of a fuller giving-out of information about our Trade Returns. It would be definitely against the national interest, to publish detailed particulars of our overseas trade, but information can often be given after consultation with the Department concerned to people anxious to get information for export purposes, and the export groups are given the fullest information that it is possible to give in all the circumstances. I reget that when he made reference to two cases, he made an attack on civil servants. It is Ministers who should be attacked, as we are here to answer for ourselves; and I am sorry he did that, as he must admit that the civil servants are extremely overworked at the present time with the enormous expansions taking place in the Departments.

Sir H. Williams: I go much further and say that the bulk of the overtime is unnecessary and due to methods of circumlocution, which ought to be avoided.

Major Lloyd George: That may be, but the hon. Gentleman chose two instances which, I assume, were an example of how the industry of this country is being held up by these delays to which he referred. I have had inquiries made into these instances. The first one, relating to an umbrella company, is, he said himself, a small matter, but is important because it is small. When the original application was made, I understand that it was suggested to the firm that the best way of getting their requirements quickly met was by joining one of these export groups. Application for recognition of the Umbrella Components War Export Group was made on 1st May. Particulars of the group's requirements of steel were sent to the Board of Trade on 2nd May, and an allocation of steel was made to the group on 8th May, which met their export requirements in full. I do not think that that can be considered as undue delay.

Sir H. Williams: My hon. and gallant Friend has overlooked the fact that I wrote to the Department of Overseas Trade about 20th February and that I did not receive the information about this organisation until two months later.

Major Lloyd George: I think my hon. Friend will agree that, rather than have a multiplicity of small firms, it is better to have larger groups to deal with. Certainly there was no delay with regard to the allocation of steel once the application had been made by that particular group; the time taken was not more than a week. In the other case, that relating to waste hair, I understand that my hon. Friend received a letter from my right hon. Friend only a day or two ago. As far as I can see from that letter, the matter was first referred to the Board of Trade by the Ministry of Supply. Inquiries were made of the firm as to the increase of export trade that might be expected as a result of the allocation of steel. On receiving satisfactory replies to these inquiries, the Board wrote to the firm on 9th May emphasising the shortage of steel and suggesting that steps should be taken to try and find some substitute if possible. Application forms were also sent to them asking that they should be filled in as soon as possible. Nothing has been heard from them since 15th May, when they said that they were in touch with the engineers and would forward the information as soon as they were able. I do not think that there is a matter of undue delay.

Sir H. Williams: I explained in the course of my speech that the people who are building the factory are not the company concerned, but the South Wales and Monmouthshire Trading Estate, which belongs to the Government. All the delay is in the Ministry of Supply, and not due to this company, which comes within the Special Area. The company is not concerned directly.

Major Lloyd George: That does not alter the facts of the case. My hon. Friend's point is one of delay, and the question as to whom the trading estate belongs to does not make the slightest difference. The whole point was that things were being held up in Government Departments, presumably in this Department; that is what was suggested. I am speaking for the Board of Trade, and the


facts I have in front of me show that there was no delay that could possibly be avoided.
The next question to which my hon. Friend referred was the balance of payments. He wanted to know to what extent the balance of payments had been improved by enemy action in certain countries which were former customers of ours. I will give the figures for 1938, since, being normal trade figures, they are more appropriate. On this basis, the adverse balance of payments against us in these countries which are now affected by enemy occupation is something in the neighbourhood of £75,000,000.
Most of the speeches that we have heard to-day have been of a helpful character, and I say again that my right hon. Friend has every reason to be satisfied with what he has been able to accomplish in a very short time. Most members who have spoken have been in agreement upon that matter with the exception of my hon. Friend the Member for West Birmingham (Mr. Higgs), who seemed to think that exporters were not normal if they did not complain. He said that every exporter should rely upon himself, as that was the only way to get trade, and in the next breath he suggested that everything must depend upon the Government; surely the proper way is to get a combination of the two.
Several points have been raised with regard to coal, which would be more appropriate on the Vote for the Mines Department.

Mr. J. Griffiths: The Export Council deal with exports generally, and if coal exports are isolated and dealt with by the Mines Department, surely that shows a big flaw in dealing with the export trade. The export policy of the Mines Department must be co-ordinated with the general export policy of this country.

Mr. Bevan: I want the hon. and gallant Gentleman to realise that, if the Vote for the Mines Department is put down, it will not be sufficient for him to say that generally questions of policy such as we have raised lie within these narrow and administrative limits, because our case is that the general lines of policy must be put right if its administration is to be intelligent.

Major Lloyd George: The Mines Department's policy is fully co-ordinated with the Government's general export policy, and I would remind the hon. Gentleman that Lord Hyndley, who is Adviser to the Mines Department, is also a member of the Export Council.

Mr. J. Griffiths: I assume that Lord Hyndley's appointment to the Export Council was as a representative of the coal mining industry and that coal export policy was, therefore, actually co-ordinated and directed by this body we have discussed to-day?

Major Lloyd George: That is so. However, I would return to the point that in the circumstances of the day it has been a really remarkable achievement to put the exports of the country where they are at this time. Increase has been rapid, especially for the months of March and April, the value of exports in April being the highest in any month since1930. If you take the volume for that period, it is just under 2 per cent. less than it was before the war. It is true that we have to face the fact that some of our markets have been taken away, but that enables us to have more material with which to tackle the markets that remain.
With regard to the question of priorities, I can only repeat what my right hon. Friend said, that the liaison arrangements which the Board of Trade have with the Ministry of Supply with regard to raw materials enable us to ensure that, where necessary, export trade requirements take precedence over less important raw material requirements. Roughly speaking, Service requirements come first, export requirements second, and home requirements third.
I hope I have dealt with the specific points which have been raised. I would like to say, in conclusion, that during the last discussion on this Vote the then President of the Board of Trade, my right hon. Friend the Member for Westmorland (Mr. Stanley) said that some people used to talk about "Business as usual" during the last war. He suggested that that was not a very sound doctrine; certainly it was not sound doctrine in the circumstances tinder which we were living last year, when expenditure on armaments was £600,000,000. If it was not wise doctrine last year, it is still less wise to-day, but it does not follow that you should say, "No business at


all." I would say that the first necessity at this moment is to provide everything we can provide for the security of our country. That, everyone agrees, is the first demand on our industry and our raw materials. The next thing is that we should export goods and raw materials to enable us to pay for the materials which we have to import. But not only do we want to do that; we also want to export for the purpose of maintaining and increasing our hold on our present markets.
One of the major causes of the depression which followed the last war—and it is almost a platitude to say so—was the loss of much of the export trade of this country. As my right hon. Friend said to-day, without exports this country cannot live. Every effort is being made, and has been made since the start of the war, to safeguard this country against the repetition of what happened at the end of the last war. Unfortunately, owing to causes which are completely outside our control—shipping and so forth—we have to maintain and increase our export markets at the expense of the home market, because that is the only place where it is possible for us to cut down. But once the position and the necessity have been pointed out, I am sure there will be no complaint. I personally hope and believe that whatever sacrifices the home consumer has to make to-day, he will get his reward when peace comes again in a real recovery of our export trade built up on the foundations which are being laid to-day.

7.29 p.m.

Mr. Bevan: There is a very important aspect of the matter which I have not had time to put to you, Sir Dennis, and which might arise. The hon. and gallant Gentleman who has just spoken always speaks most agreeably and lucidly, and I do not quarrel with anything he said nor with the fact that he did not say many other things. But the Ministry of Mines is a Department of the Board of Trade, and the fact that it has been traditional to put the Ministry of Mines Vote down in order to discuss the administration of the Department does not, I submit, and shall submit more formally on a subsequent occasion, prevent us from asking, either on the Ministry of Mines Vote or the Board of Trade Vote, why the Government do not exercise the general powers which were conferred on them by Parliament. We were stopped

from discussing any matters which involved legislation, and although my hon. and gallant Friend has not been able to reply for purely traditional and conventional reasons to observations which fell from my hon. Friend the Member for Farnworth (Mr. Tomlinson) we give notice now that we shall not permit, subject to your Ruling, any limitations whatsoever to be imposed on the Debate when we come to discuss the Ministry of Mines Vote.

Mr. E. Smith: May I put this point to the hon. and gallant Gentleman? The concluding part of his case was, I thought, theoretically sound, but having had some concrete examples of the way in which the machine is not operating efficiently to enable that theory to be translated into action, I should like to ask him whether he is satisfied that the machinery which the Board has is functioning efficiently to enable it to carry out its theoretical case.

Major Lloyd George: Certainly; the machine is working with great efficiency.

Mr. Tomlinson: I am interested in this particular aspect of the subject. I am not finding fault with the machine but with the output, and I am anxious that that which is clogging the machine should be cleared away. How is it possible by a system of priorities to achieve what the Government and Parliament desire when the material which is dealt with affects 700 or 800 different firms? Will the Minister consider taking some further powers to control the work of the machine, which is not now functioning?

Motion made, and Question, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again," put, and agreed to.—[Mr. Buchan-Hepburn.]

Committee report Progress; to sit again upon Tuesday next.

The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.

ADJOURNMENT.

Resolved, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Mr. Buchan-Hepburn.]

Adjourned accordingly at Twenty-seven Minutes before Eight o'Clock until Tuesday next, pursuant to the Resolution of the House this day.